Wow.
I intend to fight a couple of steps on the way to your distopia.
Why would anyone allow Amazon to film minors in a public space?
Why would anyone allow Amazon to record film of minors in a public space?
Why would anyone allow Amazon to have access to a database of minors?
Why would anyone create laws that do not protect my dog against robots?
Who would allow Amazon access to a database of pets?
Filming in public is already allowed. If you don’t like it, don’t put your children in public. Collecting data on children is very not-allowed, but this will be for law enforcement purposes, not advertising purposes, and Amazon will have pinky-sweared real hard that they won’t use it for advertising stuff. Also, it isn’t the 00s anymore, the tech companies have figured out how lobbying works.
Anyway, yeah a dystopia, no question. This certainly isn’t the future I want, just one that I can see with the rampant mergers, monopolies, and extremely effective AI.
Like I’ve said, I don’t think full self driving is soon. Partial self driving is already here. So, in threads like this I end up pushing against both sides, the people who think self driving is imminent, and the ones who claim “it will never work” and include in “never work” things I did last time I was in my car.
I mean, at the moment my car gets confused between stop lights (stop on red!) and pedestrian crossing or school zone signs that have a light on them (is that a traffic light? It’s not on my map! Stop!) The car does great on limited access freeways, right up until it thinks a bridge shadow is a truck, and slams on the brakes. That behavior has improved tremendously over the last few years, but it still happens frequently enough that I cover the throttle, not the brake, when the car is driving. Also, about a 50% chance it tries to send me into a closed HOV lane. There is still a very long way to go.
Who would let Amazon put a microphone or camera in their house?
Who would give facebook all their private information for free?
Answer: A huge majority of the population, apparently.
My guess is that if those minors have ever left home, say to go to school, the library or a mall, they’ve already been filmed in public. I realize that may be shocking to you.
I realize it may me shocking to you, but where I’m from that footage cannot be stored on an AWS server, has to be deleted in an appropriate time frame and cannot be used for anything else than the stated purpose.
It may be shocking to you, we (the EU) are not allowing the likes of Amazon to run roughshod over our privacy rights. It may be shocking to you that there are people who value constitutional rights other than guns.
As a reminder, the idea that Amazon might be filming people came up when it was suggested that they might use robots (such as the dog-like Boston Dynamics Spot) for deliveries and someone asked what would happen if someone messed with the robot. These robots already have multiple cameras to allow them to move about and if someone tried to mess with them, the footage could be used to identify and prosecute the offender.
I don’t see how that would interfere with anyone’s constitutional rights, any more than being filmed by a security camera in a mall or public library would.
It may depend on whether the amazon deliverybots point their cameras at the windows of private residences or not.
Well, I doubt that these hypothetical deliverybots are deliberately pointing their cameras at anyone’s windows but if one’s curtains are open, and there is a deliverybot making a delivery at that house or one nearby, presumably anything in view may be filmed, at least temporarily. I really doubt anyone is going through this footage looking for jerk-off material.
I just meant that the legality of security camera in a mall or public library is probably different, since the owners of those cameras are filming their own property.
This is not to say that filming the inside of somebody else’s house is necessarily illegal - it very well may be the case that one leaves their curtains open at their own risk.
In the hypothetical that I responded to Amazon was identifying the underage miscreant from its own “face-ID” database.
That is worlds apart from a robot-dog storing video (a sort of “black box” if you will) to be extracted in case of vandalism/accidents.
Which post was that? Because I don’t think Amazon would be identifying people in its security footage. I think the usual thing in such events is for the company to hand the footage over to the police and let them figure it out.
It was my post. In the US at least, things are going in the opposite direction. Police are limited in ways that private actors are not. Around face recognition, several cities have banned police from using it, and bills have been introduced to ban it at the state and national level. Yet, I can open Google Photos and have it show me all of the pictures that I’m in.
Sure the footage is turned over to the police, but there isn’t much stopping the delivery company from using the footage to block the attackers access to his e-books. Oh, he needs those for school? Too bad. An auto-charge on his parents’ account for the damage? They should have read the contract they signed for streaming video.
This is getting pretty far from self driving cars, but I still think it is related. The technology to identify, classify, and react to the environment will not stay limited to cars. Everything necessary for cars to self drive can also be applied to other robots, including dog-types and drones.
Automated facial recognition (which does have accuracy issues, depending on people’s race or skin color) isn’t necessary to identify people in security footage. In some cases (like the January 6 Capitol building insurrection), the authorities release the footage and ask the public to identify those pictured.
And even I’m skeptical of what you’re suggesting here.
Amazon already fires customers who have too many packages “disappear” from their porch. They can certainly do that to customers who damage their equipment.
As is their right.
I’m not suggesting Amazon should take abuse lying down. But neither should the public
/hijack
Where I’m living the trend is for deliveries made by people with (electric) cargo bikes.
That feels about right, someone earning a couple of bucks delivering stuff.
That looks like this
There is a bright future for AVs, it is just not in last mile delivery.
I agree with this.
A terribly tragic event for sure, but I can’t fathom the stupidity/complacency of such people who would intentionally leave the driver’s seat empty and put their full faith in the supposed abilities of autopilot. My mind keeps harkening back to LSLGuy’s prescient post:
And less than one month later, what can be construed as an almost worst-case scenario predicted from his observations, has come to fruition. These two men bought into the “full self-driving” marketing hype hook, line, and sinker, and paid the ultimate price for it. It’s a minor miracle that they didn’t kill any innocent bystanders as well.
Of course, since Tesla has eliminated their PR department, they can hide from any substantive questions, continue to ignore the NHTSA’s recommendations, and wait for it to all blow over, until the next round of crash test dummies sign up and repeat the cycle.
They’re going to find out that if they treat the media with contempt, the media will treat them with contempt.
It sounds like Musk has decided he can ignore everyone except his true devotees, but if public perception once turns against Tesla, it won’t easily turn back again.