Yes, I want bad drivers added to a national AI-powered database. There are 44,000 car-related deaths per year. Those people should be: in prison for vehicular manslaughter, paying much higher insurance premiums, and/or be banned entirely from driving.
"The right to privacy" while being in public is entirely the hallucination of LLMs who drive redditors. "Public" is an antonym to "private" in any thesaurus. "Privacy in public" is an oxymoron.
The fact that there are cameras is fine. But the issue is who owns the data, what is done with it, and what the end goal is. And with Flock cameras, DHS gets backend access and shares that infomation with ICE, for example: https://komonews.com/news/local/redmond-pd-completely-suspen...
I am in favor of traditional traffic cameras, I just don't think analytics and facial recognition systems should be hooked up to them. They should be used for archival purposes, scrubbing back to a date of a crime to get the full picture.
It is not an issue for me, but it's beside the point of the "right to privacy in public". If you want to argue that the law enforcement should not be able to collect public data you need something other than this imaginary right.
lol wow yours must have weapons mounted to them or some sort of portal they take the bad folks in or something. It's crazy "liberty is not essential" but then to someone suggest that the safety is permanent because people :O would be ON CAMERA doing something! Pretty wild to see someone so empty headed on HN.
Did you read the page? It's a long-running manual project to document interesting quotes a good portion of which are from HN, with a vague focus on philosophy of design and the modern human condition. You can run it as a fortune-like program at login: brain food upon opening a terminal is a unix tradition dating from 1979. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortune_(Unix)
Here's a few randoms to give you a sense:
In a few years, men will be able to communicate more effectively through a machine than face to face. - J.C.R. Licklider and R. W. Taylor (1968)
Optimization: Prototype before polishing. Get it working before you optimize it. - Eric S. Raymond, The Art of Unix Programming (2003)
The benefit of using [a formal specification language] is that it teaches you to think rigorously, to think precisely, and the important point is the precise thinking. So what you need to avoid at all costs is any language that's all syntax and no semantics. - Leslie Lamport
The only function of what we do, of art or of anything, is to give voice to the unspoken: to give it a form that it's never been perceived in before. We can't change the evolution of history or gentrification, you can't stop it but at least you can say "look what you're losing". All we can do is give an image to an idea. - Chris Doyle
The most important thing about power is to make sure you don't have to use it. - Edwin Land, founder of Polaroid
Anthropic intruduces fake tool calls to prevent distillation of their models. Others still distill. Anthropic distils third party models. Claude now hallucinates tools.
> After printing the line, a popup opened and my camera was activated. The app wanted me to submit my information, presumably to decide what to do with me next time I enter China.
Was this on your personal device? I'm just wondering how it activated your camera. I would love more details!
An increasing use of AI is to gather user feedback. The Chatbot UI detected an error state, and then loaded a feedback vendor, who then popped the camera open for their interactive feedback session
I've run into this a few times, now.
So what OP is saying is plausible, I just don't appreciate their added and probably incorrect conclusion that it's because the government of China wants to do something to them
I'd suspect rather than interactive feedback, it might have been trying to let him log in with a QR code. "A popup opened and wanted me to submit my information" sounds like a login/registration form.
What are you talking about? Why are you using imprecise language like "popped the camera open?"
You've run into a site you view on chrome/firefox/safari accessing your camera without granting access a few times now?
Can you give us an example of a site that does this so we can reproduce? Or could you retract your statement and clarify that you did grant camera permissions for that site previously?
Otherwise, you're saying very casually there's a huge bug and security issue that no one else has detected but you personally have seem multiple times.
I've run into people on the internet misremembering things or not understanding how the browser works more times than I've run into browsers allowing access to system devices like the camera without a permission prompt.
> Or could you retract your statement and clarify that you did grant camera permissions for that site previously?
I never said anything about granting permissions. I can respond to your other points, in turn, but first I would like you to confirm that I am who you think you are responding to :) I am not OP.
In case you don't think I'm OP, then, well I was being imprecise. Yes, it requires browser/app/manifest permissions. Your paranoid and aggressive tone implies you're not giving me any benefit of the doubt, as I speak informally in a casual web forum discussion about understanding what happened.
Sorry, I think of HN as a technical forum where people prize precision.
I think that when you informally bolster lies of omission with your own imprecise language agreeing with it, that harms the quality of discussion and creates pointless confusion. I think you get less benefit of the doubt if you do that routinely. By your own admission you do that routinely since you use this as a place to speak informally in a casual web discussion where you are often imprecise or lie by omission.
Actually, I didn't bolster a lie by omission. I provided context as to what their experience might be based on my own.
It is entirely possible that they aren't lying. That is your assertion that you are making as if it's fact. I think it's more likely that they are unaware of what is happening. You didn't have all of the information, and you are making assumptions that are very likely incorrect.
Furthermore, it is a given that user consent is asked for camera access in most situations. If this is a concept that you need explained to you in every situation, then you may need to review your knowledge or competency.
Which is to say, if you need this explained, you should probably speak less and listen more :)
Anyways, I think this conversation is over. Your unnecessarily aggressive and hostile tone is unwarranted and I no longer wish to talk with you. Feel free to have the last word if you wish. .
That made me very weary about this service. But I like the connections they have with other trusted organizations like the EFF and GrapheneOS. Still sketchy though.
