Police in England installed an AI camera system along a major road. It caught almost 300 drivers breaking the law in its first 3 days.
www.businessinsider.in
The AI system, designed by tech company Acusensus, takes photos of passing vehicles and flags those with potential offenses.

Police in England installed an AI camera system along a major road. It caught almost 300 drivers in its first 3 days.::An AI camera system installed along a major road in England caught 300 offenses in its first 3 days.There were 180 seat belt offenses and 117 mobile phone

  • EndlessApollo@lemmy.worldEnglish
    3113·
    1 year ago

    He’ll yea use machines to strip people of their freedom and privacy in exchange for “safety” and “security”, that could never go wrong

    • xT1TANx@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2110·
      1 year ago

      I understand your pov but I feel it’s misplaced. You are in public in a vehicle. You are in public on a side walk. The same laws that have been used to record police are the same being used here. You have no expectation of privacy in public and if you are seen or recorded breaking a law that is on you.

        • xT1TANx@lemmy.worldEnglish
          77·
          1 year ago

          I don’t think you understand my point. It’s been made clear the First Amendment applies to filming anyone, including police, in public. Any policies that try to bypass that will be destroyed in court. Those same rules apply to all of us as well.

          We can absolutely be recorded in public.

          • NuPNuA@lemm.eeEnglish
            41·
            1 year ago

            You know the Constitution has no power in the UK where this camera is right? Not that I’m opposed to it.

            • xT1TANx@lemmy.worldEnglish
              11·
              1 year ago

              The post I responded to indicated the US and UK. Of course I know that we never invaded and subjugated the English. Clearly I was talking about the US, so ya got me. Pat yourself on the back.

      • EndlessApollo@lemmy.worldEnglish
        52·
        1 year ago

        Just because someone is in public doesn’t mean that they need to be under 24/7 surveillance by big brother. Isn’t England already infested with security cameras? The US is pretty lousy with them in some places and if I knew they were actively watching me I’d make a habit of breaking them, not praise them for helping to overpolice every square inch of the country

        • xT1TANx@lemmy.worldEnglish
          13·
          1 year ago

          Again, if you can be seen in public you already are. Anyone is a witness to your crimes.

              • CalvinCopyright@lemmy.worldEnglish
                1·
                1 year ago

                Allow me to rephrase that. If an authority figure wants to prosecute you for whatever reason, even if you’ve been perfectly “legal”, they will make up a crime you committed based on something they didn’t like about you. This driving-camera crap just gives them more opportunities.

                I got ticketed not too long ago because a police officer thought I was texting when I wasn’t doing anything other than looking at Google Maps. You don’t have to have committed a crime. You just have to have yourself recorded in a way that looks like you might have committed a crime. There is a VERY BIG DIFFERENCE between those qualifiers, and it is ripe for abuse. Innocence doesn’t prove innocence, and proving innocence is what matters.

                • xT1TANx@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  21·
                  1 year ago

                  Hey, sorry to hear you got hosed. I think the thing a lot of people who follow cases of police corruption are beginning to realize is always be filming yourself in your car. Have front and rear cams and to your point here, having an in cabin camera might not be bad. It sucks that this is where we are unfortunately. Have the evidence of your innocence.