| ▲ | slibhb 8 hours ago |
| Great -- so fix those problems with legislation. |
|
| ▲ | john_strinlai 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| its not a legislation issue |
| |
| ▲ | Manuel_D 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | Except it is? If the traffic light timings are controlled by law then they can't be manipulated in that way. | | |
| ▲ | john_strinlai 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | the ones we want to prevent abuse from are the ones making the laws. police and governments break existing laws all the time. >they can't be manipulated if you want something that cant be manipulated or abused, the solution is technical, not legislative. | | |
| ▲ | Manuel_D 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The ones making the laws are your elected officials. If you want a city to pass a law prohibiting changing the traffic light timings, then go campaign for a candidate that has that on their platform. | | |
| ▲ | john_strinlai 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | >If you want a city to pass a law prohibiting changing the traffic light timings, then go campaign for a candidate that has that on their platform. people love saying this as if its some sort of gotcha. ive been campaigning for candidates i believe in since ive been able to vote, which is over 40 years now. additionally, i voice my opinion locally and online (hi). |
| |
| ▲ | slibhb 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | That's why we have an independent judiciary. What's the alternative to fixing this with laws/lawsuits? Do we riot when "the police and governments break laws"? | | |
| ▲ | john_strinlai 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | >That's why we have an independent judiciary. which is something that only happens after abuse occurs, is costly (time and money), presents a risk of retaliation, and offers no guarantee of being made whole. >What's the alternative to fixing this with laws/lawsuits? not doing mass surveillance means we don't need legislation about it. >Do we riot when "the police and governments break laws"? why did you scare quote this? |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | wat10000 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Right, and while we're at it, we can stop theft by having the thieves choose not to steal. If your approach is that we can fix abuses by having the abuser write down rules that say they're not allowed to abuse us, why limit it to public surveillance? Stick cameras in everybody's houses while we're at it. Think of all the horrible crimes that go on behind closed doors. Solve the privacy issues with legislation. |
| |
| ▲ | slibhb 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | If red light cameras are incorrectly calibrated, that seems like something that could be challenged in court and changed. > If your approach is that we can fix abuses by having the abuser write down rules that say they're not allowed to abuse us, why limit it to public surveillance? Stick cameras in everybody's houses while we're at it. Think of all the horrible crimes that go on behind closed doors. Solve the privacy issues with legislation. People have a constitutional right to privacy in their own homes. | | |
| ▲ | wat10000 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | There's a pretty big gulf between "unalloyed good" and "ripe for abuse, but the courts might save you." | |
| ▲ | rc5150 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | "People have a constitutional right to privacy in their own homes." When the current administration is wiping its ass with the constitution on a daily basis, are you really so daft you can't see the direction we're headed in as a society in regard to an unregulated surveillance dragnet? People have a constitutional right to due process and to not get murdered in the street by ICE (that's pronounced T-R-A-I-T-O-R, btw) but look how well that's been going. |
|
|
