> “For years, customers told us they wanted eyes in the places a fixed camera couldn’t reach, and peace of mind in the spots they’d never want one,” said Jamie Siminoff, founder and chief inventor of Ring.
By "customers" I'll just assume they mean the data brokers and law enforcement.
That's pretty interesting, what sort of people have you discussed this with? I'd imagine that many people in the center and leftward would at least try to inject some nuance into such blunt statements.
Well, one that immediately comes to mind is an asylum seeker. Whether or not a country is willing or able to accept this person is, in my opinion, secondary to that person's immediate safety. I would hope that that person would be a well-behaved resident and go through the proper avenues to get documentation. In the meantime, I would consider their illegal immigration a "good" thing.
I can't imagine having to raise kids with both parents working. Good on you and your partner for holding the line on screen time in spite of the difficulty.
> That drive fucking sucks ass, don't get me wrong, but oh well, that's part of life
Such a great attitude. Wish everyone saw it this way. I've tanked a few car rides like this but I'll do it a hundred more times before I throw a pacifier at my kids.
Your claim is that if someone is bothering you then they should be arrested?
I dunno about you, but that's not really how I want our society to work.
As other people have point out, the robot could have navigated around the blockage. Just as you could walk away from someone bothering you without getting the police involved lol.
> Your claim is that if someone is bothering you then they should be arrested?
No, my claim is that people who violate public order laws in the public street should be arrested even if they claim that the reason it's important for them to violate those public order laws is because they're protesting something and a protest won't be effective unless it annoys people. I want that to not be an effective defense against getting immediately arrested and physically removed from the scene by cops.
I might agree with you to some extent. At the same time, I find your apparent desire to immediately weaponize the police against protestors fairly disturbing. "Immediate" arrest and physical removal should not be the default first response in a situation like a peaceful protest.
If it's an actual peaceful protest, that just involves people advocating for something in the public commons that doesn't disrupt the ability of anyone else to the use the public commons, then sure this is a reasonable point. I was responding to the person who said sarcastically "Yea, protest should happen where it doesn't bother anyone. Right.", who would likely not find that kind of actually-peaceful protest likely to be effective.
And I do actually want immediate arrest and physical removal to be the default first response in a situation like an effective protest. I do not want people to get away with disrupting the public commons and then claiming that they were justified in doing so because they were carrying out a protest. Indeed, I want the police to immediately arrest and physically remove anyone at all who is disrupting the public commons. The police are a weapon, and I want that weapon used effectively against people who disrupt the public commons, so that the public commons can be usable by everyone.
Thank you for your honest answers, this is an interesting thing to think through.
I don't think that the entirety of the public commons needs 100% uptime. Occasional disruption could happen for any number of reasons like temporary events, construction, and protest [0].
"Immediate" action is such a strange requirement to have. Such a desire seems like a waste of police time. Like in TFA's example , the commons were ever so slightly disrupted: anyone could have gone around the woman. Occasional minor to moderate disruption of the commons for the purposes of free expression is a feature of our society that I think should be maintained.
The clock is repaired, but a banker doesn't use it. Inspired by the baker, she follows the sun. In the summer she opens while everyone else is asleep. In the winter the windows stay closed until nearly 1000. Locals become increasingly confused by the erratic hours. No one can agree on when the bank will open on a cloudy morning. When confronted she mutters something about the baker. At the local banking conference she presents on her newfound wisdom and receives a standing ovation.
Doesn't down-tuning and then using one of these accomplish that?
reply