top | item 42469670

(no title)

thiagocsf | 1 year ago

Ah yes. The old anti-privacy mantra: you have nothing to worry about, if you have nothing to hide.

discuss

order

sofixa|1 year ago

It's a question if you put people's individual "privacy" (quotes because you're driving in public, on public roads paid for by the public, under public laws, and under the public's view - there's not really privacy as to how you're driving, everyone out there can see it) over people's collective right to live?

Road deaths are among the leading causes of death in multiple developed countries.

guappa|1 year ago

Roads are public but unless you have someone following around you can't know where everyone is at all times. But with tracker now you have mass surveillance!

We criticize chinese government but we do much worse.

epolanski|1 year ago

I did write "besides privacy" because it is a valid concern indeed.

But considering that most people don't give two damns about their privacy (or at least act like it, keeping 24/7 a tracking device on them and sharing all of their lives non stop) what would be their valid reason to not have a tracking device for insurance purposes on their cars?

lucianbr|1 year ago

Will the data collection and interpretation be perfect? What if the map with the speed limits is inaccurate and my commute goes through a road where the limit is 70, traffic drives at 70, but the system thinks the limit is 30?

My car displays the speed limit in the dash, as a helper, and sometimes the above happens. If it had automatic braking for crossing the speed limit, it would be a disaster.

Also, if I drive 70 on a 70 road completely covered in snow, will the system know I'm doing something dangerous?

Automatic judgement of people is a bad idea, and it surprises me that anyone who is working in software development would think otherwise.