Police in England installed an AI camera system along a major road. It caught almost 300 drivers breaking the law in its first 3 days.
www.businessinsider.in
The AI system, designed by tech company Acusensus, takes photos of passing vehicles and flags those with potential offenses.

Police in England installed an AI camera system along a major road. It caught almost 300 drivers in its first 3 days.::An AI camera system installed along a major road in England caught 300 offenses in its first 3 days.There were 180 seat belt offenses and 117 mobile phone

  • The King@lemmy.world
    English
    161·
    10 months ago

    The slippery slope is what makes this not okay. It’s a completely unnecessary invasion of privacy in the guise of “safety”.

    I’d love to see some statistics showing that these things are anything other than an additional tax on the drivers. This is bad for everyone and it desensitizes you and opens the door to further surveillance I’m the future.

    • steltek@lemm.eeEnglish
      143·
      10 months ago

      “Slippery slope” is a common argument but usually flawed. In this case, driving is an extraordinarily regulated privilege and despite that, it still results in massive deaths and permanent life changing injury every year. In the US, car crashes are the number one cause of death for children. It’s difficult to draw a line between expanding driving enforcement to gross losses in privacy like many here are envisioning.

      It also ignores the benefits to civil rights. Again, I don’t know about the UK but in the US, traffic enforcement by police is very unevenly applied. Minorities routinely get their privacy violated on pretexts while cops don’t even pay lip service to the rules.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.worldEnglish
        8·
        10 months ago

        I am just waiting for the article in the year that shows this system falsely reports darker skin people as breaking the law more often. It sees their hand and decides that the hand looks like a black cellphone or something.

        Just like literally every other automated system with a camera that evaluates people.

      • flamingarms@feddit.ukEnglish
        51·
        10 months ago

        Just as an aside, gun violence is now the leading cause of death for children in the US; vehicle collisions are now 2nd, due to gun violence increasing and vehicle collisions decreasing.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish
      167·
      10 months ago

      It isn’t though.

      It isn’t unnecessary invasion of privacy. You have no expectation of privacy when driving around on public streets, and to say you’re allowed to break the law and use personal privacy as an excuse is absurd.

      • bladerunnerspider@lemmy.worldEnglish
        101·
        10 months ago

        While I don’t disagree with the statement around privacy in public, I would encourage you to temper that thought with the realization that when that was developed we did not have the ability to be everywhere at once with cameras or fly drones over people’s homes or track cellphones with GPS or use computers to process this information.

        This information can and has been abused.

        Maybe we should change our expectations to SOME privacy in public.

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.worldEnglish
          3·
          10 months ago

          If there was no expectation of privacy why do governments get upset about window tinting and license plate laser blocking and radar detectors? It should be no different than curtains, shutters, and any other form of passive radio.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.worldEnglish
        73·
        10 months ago

        Yeah people say this but it isn’t really true. If I was following, posting logs, taking photos, posting online those photos and logs of some kid in your family I am pretty sure this would bother you. Way back in my uni days there was an incident about someone doing that to the coeds on campus. The school was able to stop it solely because he used the school computer not by some legal mechanism.

        You only think you have no expectation of privacy when no one tries to violate it.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish
          42·
          10 months ago

          Happens to celebrities. The reason it doesn’t happen to me is I’m not very interesting.

          But it been annoying isn’t really the point it’s not how the law works. I don’t make the law, I’m just pointing out that how the law works, and under the law you have no expectation of privacy in public.

        • steltek@lemm.eeEnglish
          54·
          10 months ago

          A beautiful strawman. This is about driving and traffic enforcement by the government, not creepy campus stalking by a crazy person.

          There is no conceivable reality where the government will publicly post your movements for everyone to see based this system. None.

          • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.worldEnglish
            43·
            10 months ago

            Does expectation of privacy disappear if there is no abuse? I wonder because expectation of privacy is about belief not based on motivations or integrity of others.

            • steltek@lemm.eeEnglish
              22·
              10 months ago

              You’re still beating up that strawman. Expectations of privacy change based on context. Driving = no. Walking around = yes.

              At least in the US, I believe this is actual legal case law so I’m not making stuff up here.