If I get a petty fine for something I don't think is a big deal, it seems like quite an injustice at the time but when I step back, I usually can understand the reasoning.
I have no special hate for my government. I've carried our flag into battle myself. I just call a spade a spade, and believe in a level playing field. I see its creator as doing us all a service, your calling him out for taking the moral high-ground, and I think his position is justified and commendable. Happy to discuss my views, but don't throw around the word "hate" willy-nilly.
What we are talking about IS working within the system. This addresses our justice system used as a revenue source instead of a system of justice directly. It does so staying completely within the bounds of the laws we have on the books. In fact, it seems to work so well, I expect the government to try and change the laws themselves. I don't see a problem with it.
I would like to see this sort of thing used when the same justice system is used as a club, or leverage, or threat.
Any perversion of what we call a justice system is wrong, and this sort of thing is the natural course of things. This is SPECIFICALLY allowing the citizen to ensure the authority itself is ALSO working within the rules of the system. Working to change laws within the system is all good and well, but unfortunately, completely useless when the system is ignoring its own rules to begin with. The tickets are being dropped like crazy because they are issued in error, issued maliciously, or issued sloppily. The courts don't care what kind of error, and it goes both ways. You screwed up the paperwork to start your new business? that's a $150.00 filing fee and you start over. We citizens accept this as the way our system has to work in order to be effective. There are a whole class of people who make a living off this very thing. We call them lawyers. This is just the shoe on the other foot.
To put it in technical terms, what do you think the margin for error is on a red light camera? I'm making this up as I go, but I bet its not 100% accurate every time. How about a speed camera? +/- 5 mph? Maybe 5% in error, no big deal right? Now how many tickets do you imagine a single camera issues in a day? Multiply that number by the amount of cross streets with traffic lights in your local suburb and the numbers become staggering.
And its getting worse, for the majority of us, taking a day off to fight an erroneous traffic infraction costs us more than just paying the damn thing, even if we decline the inevitable plea bargain and 50$ fine. The bean counters know this. Sit in on a city council meeting from time to time, pay attention to the discussion when it comes to automated systems that generate revenue, and you may find a better target for your no moral high-ground argument.
I also see this costing local government a lot of cheddar, and I am completely expecting the legal system as a club to come out next. We will hear about this again. Care for a wager?
So your saying automating my response to automated traffic tickets is a bad thing? I'm instead supposed to expend my resources to pay a lawyer and/or suspend my own resource generation method to attend traffic court in my own defense of said automatically generated traffic fines?
This guy found a useful and novel use of technology for citizens to defend themselves in direct response to another useful and novel use of a technology by government to extract revenue from its citizens.
It is driving commerce by the income its generating its creator, its helping helping our keepers by forcing them to do their jobs the way the people have outlined for them, and its helping citizens by providing a defense that does not cost an entire days time.
Of course this may create a group of people undeterred by UNJUST or MISHANDLED traffic fines, but that's supposed to be all of us anyway. That's the point of the whole thing to begin with. If the fine is deserving (within the bounds of the law, backed up by the eye-witness account of the COMPLETELY TRUSTWORTHY LEO, filed in triplicate ect) I'm sure it will stick, regardless of the use of the automated system this dude/dudette has created.
This is not going to make people "drive like maniacs", there are still plenty of incentives to not be an asshole, such as staying alive, keeping my expensive car pretty, not being pulled over, and the general desire to not be an asshole.
Of course there are and always will be assholes on the road though, so if you REALLY want to you can point and say SEE! SEE! the computers made em do it!! I bet you can't guess what happens after that. HINT- GOVERNMENTS HATE COMPETITION.
Right, using technology to get the upper hand in civil matters as bad bad bad. Unless the government is doing to make money off of citizens, in that case, it ay-oh-kay!
BACK IN LINE CITIZEN! You will pay whatever fine we choose to levy against you.
The genie is already out of the bottle. I can fab a full auto anything in a weekend in a modestly stocked garage. Sure, my firearms will look like something out of fallout, but this makes them no less killy. Outlaw the legal avenue for semi autos and you will just empower those who would fill the gap. Black markets have sprung up around much less, and the market for firearms is already established.
Not to mention the MEEEELIONS of firearms currently in circulation.
Every time this happens (which is WAY to much) I hear some official say things like, "We need to succeed every time, the bad guys only need to succeed once."
It is starting to look like this is the playbook for stripping away our liberties as well. We must count on our elected officials to shoot this kind of garbage down EVERY time, but just like these heinous attacks, they only need to win once.
Every now and then we fail and one of them "slips through the cracks". Sound familiar?
Due to the nature of these laws, once they are on the books, close scrutiny and oversight are both nearly non-existent in the interest of national security.
I'm just another tech guy, so speaking with no authority beyond common sense, I think it would be a good idea to periodically give our officials a "real world refresher" and subject them to the system they design but seem themselves to be above. Say..... A week in a private prison, 6 months making the median wage, mandatory public defenders for all offences related to their duties as a public official.... there are plenty more things I can think of that would improve drastically if those making the decisions found themselves forced to interact with it. Specific to this story, all of their PERSONAL online activity turned over to some agency with the power to utterly destroy them. This could go a long way towards scaling back the FREQUENCY of these power-grab attempts, as well as improving the general quality of our public services.
It's 100% the responsibility of the reviewer to verify the integrity of the hardware they are reviewing. When you receive hardware for free, specifically to voice an opinion that somebody decided matters enough to lose a sale, its important to consider the source and act accordingly.
Its about what I may want to keep to myself TOMORROW.
Nobody want your dick-pics....... until they make taking them a felony.... and then when you speak out against XYZ, you can be quietly dealt with, publicly shamed, and discredited.... all within the bounds of the law.
There was a time in my country when the people decided to make booze illegal. Maybe tomorrow some politic will make something *ELSE* I do every day illegal. See where I'm going with this? Nothing good will come of the vast stores of data we keep surrendering in exchange for pretty maps, trendy devices, and free email.
Ditch the smart-phone. Its not your ally. You don't really need it, and its making you less able. Its a crutch. Hell I know a guy who can't even drive home from work without a GPS system. I bet you know somebody like that too.
Buy yourself a dumb prepaid candybar (under your favorite cartoon characters name) if you REALLY feel you must have comms in your pocket, or your employment demands it you can make THEM buy it for you.
Your data has real VALUE. You are being ripped off every second of every day, so that advertisers can help rip you off even more tomorrow, and maximize yesterdays ripoff today.
ZOMG GOVERNMENT is watching me! = sounds like crazy ravings on purpose.
Learn to read a map. You don't NEED GPS. Remember how to make and keep friends here in the real world. Remember how to learn and apply without selling your privacy away.
You only THINK you absolutely must have internet in your pocket. You can have your privacy instead.
Here's a selfie of me reading between the lines. And a video of me wondering why nobody else is thinking about the COST of the "social media revolution"
For years, you and yours drum has been beating to the tune of, "You have no expectation of privacy while in public" Congratulations to you! We are all now merrily dancing to your beat. Now that we are finally liking the song, you would change the the words?
If you look at the circus that has popped up around ride sharing, with the miles of empty cabs and unused pricey medallions, I'm not surprised regulators are doing what they can to stop this before the same circus starts.. We keep aiming for "disruptive technology ideas" but you have to expect some push-back when your idea is a threat to an entire entrenched industry that employs MANY people, and gets some of them FILTHY rich. I'll bet the boardrooms and airline owners have been blowing up the FAA hotlines since they first heard of this.
I understand this may not be as "safe" as flying a big faceless commercial airline, but I'll take dangerous freedoms over safe regulations any day. If we can find a way to cut all the extra cost down to reasonable, and I am allowed to book a private flight with less bullshit, groping, lost luggage, "random" searches and fake smiles, AND I can bring my own snack, sit next to the pilot, and have nobody kicking my seat- I say we go for it. Surely the big airlines can find a way to compete.
Momma mini-van and Pappa Windsor knot can still pay for the extra care when shipping their little snowflake off to Grandma old-schools house. I'm happy with hitchhiking onto some old puddle-jumpers spare seat for a fraction of cost. Don't be so scared people, some of us are OK with a little risk.
For a VERY long time artists would happily settle for dinner and soft bed in return for a performance. It was this way as soon as we started banging sticks together and painting up caves. Then, not long ago, some guy started offering 5 dollars to sing into his can and it all went to hell.
Ever heard the expression "I got it for a song" ? It implies that a song costs very little.
I eat Taco-Bell. It the only one I will admit to. I know, its bad, but I have always loved the stuff. That said...
Taco-bell has an app, you can order your addictive $.99 nacho-cheese-slime-rollups in exactly the manner you mentioned. With an app. On your $900 smartphone phone.
When I see the sillyness of tasty budget sustenance garbage being ordered by teenagers via high-end smartphones, I cant help but think, "You could order 850 slime-rollups for the price of your little toy there.... but then you would have to talk to each other"
My users are mostly incredibly intelligent and quite well to do. They smile and nod when I try to explain the privacy implications of ANY technology. They have no problems with Windows 10. Your average user gives less than a shit about tracking, analytics, or any of the other little sideshows that we "tech people" jump up and down about all the time.
I would say its- 1. One can generally Frankenstein a usable system out of 2 or 3 dead ones in place of buying new. Old computers are easy to find now-a-days. 2. Everybody already has a computer in their pocket. 3. SMBs are jaded, and have a closet full of old hardware already, why spend more money? (see 1.)
Development still needs something relatively new, but the receptionists and shipping departments get the dinosaurs.
Slashdot Mirror
If I get a petty fine for something I don't think is a big deal, it seems like quite an injustice at the time but when I step back, I usually can understand the reasoning.
You are ruining it for the rest of us.
I have no special hate for my government. I've carried our flag into battle myself. I just call a spade a spade, and believe in a level playing field.
I see its creator as doing us all a service, your calling him out for taking the moral high-ground, and I think his position is justified and commendable. Happy to discuss my views, but don't throw around the word "hate" willy-nilly.
What we are talking about IS working within the system. This addresses our justice system used as a revenue source instead of a system of justice directly. It does so staying completely within the bounds of the laws we have on the books. In fact, it seems to work so well, I expect the government to try and change the laws themselves. I don't see a problem with it.
I would like to see this sort of thing used when the same justice system is used as a club, or leverage, or threat.
Any perversion of what we call a justice system is wrong, and this sort of thing is the natural course of things. This is SPECIFICALLY allowing the citizen to ensure the authority itself is ALSO working within the rules of the system. Working to change laws within the system is all good and well, but unfortunately, completely useless when the system is ignoring its own rules to begin with. The tickets are being dropped like crazy because they are issued in error, issued maliciously, or issued sloppily. The courts don't care what kind of error, and it goes both ways. You screwed up the paperwork to start your new business? that's a $150.00 filing fee and you start over. We citizens accept this as the way our system has to work in order to be effective. There are a whole class of people who make a living off this very thing. We call them lawyers. This is just the shoe on the other foot.
To put it in technical terms, what do you think the margin for error is on a red light camera? I'm making this up as I go, but I bet its not 100% accurate every time. How about a speed camera? +/- 5 mph? Maybe 5% in error, no big deal right? Now how many tickets do you imagine a single camera issues in a day? Multiply that number by the amount of cross streets with traffic lights in your local suburb and the numbers become staggering.
And its getting worse, for the majority of us, taking a day off to fight an erroneous traffic infraction costs us more than just paying the damn thing, even if we decline the inevitable plea bargain and 50$ fine. The bean counters know this. Sit in on a city council meeting from time to time, pay attention to the discussion when it comes to automated systems that generate revenue, and you may find a better target for your no moral high-ground argument.
I also see this costing local government a lot of cheddar, and I am completely expecting the legal system as a club to come out next. We will hear about this again. Care for a wager?
Why is nobody buying L337 H@XX0r G.I.Joe®? Or Constantly contractor Sally©? Or for the minorities of Indian decent, there is always Blue Badge Barbie®.
So your saying automating my response to automated traffic tickets is a bad thing? I'm instead supposed to expend my resources to pay a lawyer and/or suspend my own resource generation method to attend traffic court in my own defense of said automatically generated traffic fines?
This guy found a useful and novel use of technology for citizens to defend themselves in direct response to another useful and novel use of a technology by government to extract revenue from its citizens.
It is driving commerce by the income its generating its creator, its helping helping our keepers by forcing them to do their jobs the way the people have outlined for them, and its helping citizens by providing a defense that does not cost an entire days time.
Of course this may create a group of people undeterred by UNJUST or MISHANDLED traffic fines, but that's supposed to be all of us anyway. That's the point of the whole thing to begin with. If the fine is deserving (within the bounds of the law, backed up by the eye-witness account of the COMPLETELY TRUSTWORTHY LEO, filed in triplicate ect) I'm sure it will stick, regardless of the use of the automated system this dude/dudette has created.
This is not going to make people "drive like maniacs", there are still plenty of incentives to not be an asshole, such as staying alive, keeping my expensive car pretty, not being pulled over, and the general desire to not be an asshole.
Of course there are and always will be assholes on the road though, so if you REALLY want to you can point and say SEE! SEE! the computers made em do it!! I bet you can't guess what happens after that. HINT- GOVERNMENTS HATE COMPETITION.
Now go buy the new and improved I-Phone, the "I-Phone 1984+Orwell 2b"
(beatings sold separately, but if you sign up for our handy "lifestyle monitoring service", we will throw them in at a reduced cost! What a deal!)
Right, using technology to get the upper hand in civil matters as bad bad bad. Unless the government is doing to make money off of citizens, in that case, it
ay-oh-kay!
BACK IN LINE CITIZEN! You will pay whatever fine we choose to levy against you.
The genie is already out of the bottle. I can fab a full auto anything in a weekend in a modestly stocked garage. Sure, my firearms will look like something out of fallout, but this makes them no less killy. Outlaw the legal avenue for semi autos and you will just empower those who would fill the gap. Black markets have sprung up around much less, and the market for firearms is already established.
Not to mention the MEEEELIONS of firearms currently in circulation.
Go fish.
Every time this happens (which is WAY to much) I hear some official say things like, "We need to succeed every time, the bad guys only need to succeed once."
It is starting to look like this is the playbook for stripping away our liberties as well. We must count on our elected officials to shoot this kind of garbage down EVERY time, but just like these heinous attacks, they only need to win once.
Every now and then we fail and one of them "slips through the cracks". Sound familiar?
Due to the nature of these laws, once they are on the books, close scrutiny and oversight are both nearly non-existent in the interest of national security.
I'm just another tech guy, so speaking with no authority beyond common sense, I think it would be a good idea to periodically give our officials a "real world refresher" and subject them to the system they design but seem themselves to be above. Say..... A week in a private prison, 6 months making the median wage, mandatory public defenders for all offences related to their duties as a public official.... there are plenty more things I can think of that would improve drastically if those making the decisions found themselves forced to interact with it. Specific to this story, all of their PERSONAL online activity turned over to some agency with the power to utterly destroy them. This could go a long way towards scaling back the FREQUENCY of these power-grab attempts, as well as improving the general quality of our public services.
Wow, thank you. I had no idea. If it takes a shit is the reviewer expected to pay for it too?
It's 100% the responsibility of the reviewer to verify the integrity of the hardware they are reviewing. When you receive hardware for free, specifically to voice an opinion that somebody decided matters enough to lose a sale, its important to consider the source and act accordingly.
Made manifest. Progress.
Its about what I may want to keep to myself TOMORROW.
Nobody want your dick-pics....... until they make taking them a felony.... and then when you speak out against XYZ, you can be quietly dealt with, publicly shamed, and discredited.... all within the bounds of the law.
There was a time in my country when the people decided to make booze illegal. Maybe tomorrow some politic will make something *ELSE* I do every day illegal. See where I'm going with this? Nothing good will come of the vast stores of data we keep surrendering in exchange for pretty maps, trendy devices, and free email.
Ditch the smart-phone. Its not your ally. You don't really need it, and its making you less able. Its a crutch. Hell I know a guy who can't even drive home from work without a GPS system. I bet you know somebody like that too.
Buy yourself a dumb prepaid candybar (under your favorite cartoon characters name) if you REALLY feel you must have comms in your pocket, or your employment demands it you can make THEM buy it for you.
Your data has real VALUE. You are being ripped off every second of every day, so that advertisers can help rip you off even more tomorrow, and maximize yesterdays ripoff today.
ZOMG GOVERNMENT is watching me! = sounds like crazy ravings on purpose.
Best solution: Ditch the mobile phone completely.
Learn to read a map. You don't NEED GPS.
Remember how to make and keep friends here in the real world.
Remember how to learn and apply without selling your privacy away.
You only THINK you absolutely must have internet in your pocket. You can have your privacy instead.
Here's a selfie of me reading between the lines. And a video of me wondering why nobody else is thinking about the COST of the "social media revolution"
For years, you and yours drum has been beating to the tune of, "You have no expectation of privacy while in public"
Congratulations to you! We are all now merrily dancing to your beat. Now that we are finally liking the song, you would change the the words?
Keep it up. Just because we cant win the game doesn't mean we cant have a little fun with it anyway.
Old men in government still out of touch with the way technology works. *News@11.us*
If you look at the circus that has popped up around ride sharing, with the miles of empty cabs and unused pricey medallions, I'm not surprised regulators are doing what they can to stop this before the same circus starts.. We keep aiming for "disruptive technology ideas" but you have to expect some push-back when your idea is a threat to an entire entrenched industry that employs MANY people, and gets some of them FILTHY rich. I'll bet the boardrooms and airline owners have been blowing up the FAA hotlines since they first heard of this.
I understand this may not be as "safe" as flying a big faceless commercial airline, but I'll take dangerous freedoms over safe regulations any day. If we can find a way to cut all the extra cost down to reasonable, and I am allowed to book a private flight with less bullshit, groping, lost luggage, "random" searches and fake smiles, AND I can bring my own snack, sit next to the pilot, and have nobody kicking my seat- I say we go for it. Surely the big airlines can find a way to compete.
Momma mini-van and Pappa Windsor knot can still pay for the extra care when shipping their little snowflake off to Grandma old-schools house. I'm happy with hitchhiking onto some old puddle-jumpers spare seat for a fraction of cost. Don't be so scared people, some of us are OK with a little risk.
For a VERY long time artists would happily settle for dinner and soft bed in return for a performance. It was this way as soon as we started banging sticks together and painting up caves. Then, not long ago, some guy started offering 5 dollars to sing into his can and it all went to hell.
Ever heard the expression "I got it for a song" ? It implies that a song costs very little.
TRUTH!
Oceanians live in a constant state of being monitored by the Party, through the use of advanced, invasive technology.
I eat Taco-Bell. It the only one I will admit to. I know, its bad, but I have always loved the stuff. That said...
Taco-bell has an app, you can order your addictive $.99 nacho-cheese-slime-rollups in exactly the manner you mentioned. With an app. On your $900 smartphone phone.
When I see the sillyness of tasty budget sustenance garbage being ordered by teenagers via high-end smartphones, I cant help but think, "You could order 850 slime-rollups for the price of your little toy there.... but then you would have to talk to each other"
THIS.
WHY is nobody jumping up and down over THIS?
Kind of like a torture jukebox.
This is my new favorite thing.
My users are mostly incredibly intelligent and quite well to do. They smile and nod when I try to explain the privacy implications of ANY technology. They have no problems with Windows 10. Your average user gives less than a shit about tracking, analytics, or any of the other little sideshows that we "tech people" jump up and down about all the time.
I would say its-
1. One can generally Frankenstein a usable system out of 2 or 3 dead ones in place of buying new. Old computers are easy to find now-a-days.
2. Everybody already has a computer in their pocket.
3. SMBs are jaded, and have a closet full of old hardware already, why spend more money? (see 1.)
Development still needs something relatively new, but the receptionists and shipping departments get the dinosaurs.