Slashdot Mirror
Software Describes Surveillance Footage In AI-Generated Text
holy_calamity writes "A computer vision research group at UCLA has put together a system that watches surveillance footage and generates a text description of the events in real time. It only works on traffic cameras for now but demonstrates how sophisticated computer vision is becoming. Interestingly, the system was built thanks to a database of millions of human-labeled images put together by Chinese workers."
There needs to be an expectation of privacy regarding recordings of people in public places. There is a huge difference between being seen vs. having one's every public move recorded, indexed and archived.
To rid the world of every shred of privacy remaining (not that there is much, admittedly). /shudder
Remember to maintain your supply of
"Possible" is the key word there. I'm sure that a human will review all possible violations, to determine if one actually occurred. I imagine that this could allow for better policing, because less people would need to be hired for less work, allowing police to use their time more effectively.
Personally, I'd love to see a system that automatically monitors video footage of every single highway merge ramp in the city where I live. Maybe if all those assholes who fly up the shoulder and cut in at the last second (in order to gain a dozen car lengths when merging onto the highway) were to get an automated $90 ticket in the mail two weeks later, they'd catch the hint.
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
What's broken then?
The Laws?
Or the Enforcement?
Why aren't you encrypting your e-mail?
Probably both, but don't forget about unequal distribution of wealth and its relationship to social problems like crime
Check the map; notice the USA is on par with Mexico (and Central America in general). This is not a good thing!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient
No, they wouldn't get the ticket. The person who has to swerve to avoid those idiots would get the ticket.
"Possible" is the key word there. I'm sure that a human will review all possible violations, to determine if one actually occurred. I imagine that this could allow for better policing, because less people would need to be hired for less work, allowing police to use their time more effectively.
Sir, you and I must have a vastly different definition for 'better'.
(And do you really think that this would allow the police to be more effective? They will become just as effective as necessary to raise enough fines to cover their budgets, and if we are lucky, just their budgets and not revenue)
Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
Yeah, too bad that's a gross generalization that doesn't correlate with reality. Besides the fact that the concept of wealth inequality as moral negative is nonsense, it doesn't take too much analysis to see that while the US and Mexico may have similar ratios of rich to poor (which by itself is misleading, as 10^4:10^3 is the same ratio as 10^2:10, but the magnitude is different, so the case really is that the poor in the US are richer than the poor in Mexico, and the rich in Mexico are poorer than the rich in the US. The ratio ultimately is the same, but the magnitude is different, which is expressed in the difference in the quality of life), crime in Mexico is worse. Similarly, in 'more equal' countries according to your favored methodology like Columbia, Nigeria, etc. crime and quality of life is worse than in 'less equal' places such as Hong Kong. Your theory simply does not correlate to reality, but I doubt this will stop you.
I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
Nothing is broken.
The law is an attempt to formalize our sense of justice with relatively few, simple rules. Since this is a very complex system we are trying to formalize, while keeping the formalization simple enough to be usable, the law has to be imperfect. It will never be perfect. It can not be perfect.
Enforcing imperfect laws rigorously and methodically is just stupid and a recipe for disaster. Fortunately enforcement is also imperfect so it leaves us some maneuvering space to compensate for the imperfect laws.
Pray enforcement never becomes perfect.
This seems to miss the point. A society that was truly just would actually consider on a case-by-case basis whether it was in the public interest to enforce each infraction of the law. In many cases, the harm to the public is negligible or non-existant, or the law was broken as a form of protest against a law that is generally seen to be unfair (e.g. the American DMCA). If all these cases were summarily determined to be infraction without considering the public interest, society would become a tyranny of law, a place where all that matters is that the rules are absolute.
There are countless examples of the heroes that are created by such a society, and they date back throughout human existence. While they have been exaggerated to the point of legend, the message is clear: Any attempt to make the law absolute will result in overwhelming revolt by citizens, and a government that need fight for its existence in the face of overwhelming support of an outlaw.
"Please describe the scientific nature of the 'whammy'" - Agent Scully