cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/54045255
I have adopted the habit of ignoring red lights.
Rationale: If cars did not exist, cyclists would never have to stop. Every time I must stop at a traffic signal it is to cator for motorists who are mostly a self-serving detriment to public health and safety. #FuckCars.
I used to obey all the traffic rules but after coming to the realisation that much of my time is wasted and my journey is downgraded so copious lazy people can exploit a luxury (some demographics aside). Fuck that. I now run red lights like crazy.
Now I must consider that Tesla may fuck up my lifestyle because Tesla is a moving point of unchecked uncontrolled surveillance. Theoretically, Tesla could be grabbing the faces of cyclists. It could offer to report cyclists who run reds. It could sell that info to law enforcement. Am I overthinking this or is this a problem to watch out for?
OTOH, I am somewhat looking forward to a day when I can spot when a car is self-driving and (if I can ever gain confidence that they won’t mistake me for a tumbleweed) I would happily take liberties – to cut-off the car and force it to slow down and give way. I hope that tactic can go from dream world to real world.
Yuh-huh!
No. It doesn’t. Literally all modern cars have cameras. They’re required by law, and have been for some time now.
Well, yes, but that’s not what’s happening. Businesses can be profitable without surveillance. They did it for thousands of years.
Lots of companies care about privacy to the extent that their consumers care about privacy.
My statement remains true despite yours. Being required by law does not cease to make them agents of surveillance. Nor does this obviate the point I was making.
That’s not how corporations work. Corporations have a duty to their shareholders to maximise profit. To fail to do so is to violate the constitution of the corporation.
Exceptionally, there are some corporations with good causes coded into their constitution whereby profit is either impossible or not a priority. Tesla is not one of them.
Nonsense.
Not even that. Even if you have a corporation who presents itself as privacy respecting, like DuckDuckGo, in the end it is only privacy theatre in play (amid privacy scandals by DDG). It’s about perception of privacy. And that perception only relates to the patrons, not other people. A cyclist riding past a Tesla is not a Tesla customer. It’s orthoganol to Tesla’s privacy policy, even if Musk gave a shit about cyclists (when in fact Musk is outspoken against cycling infrastructure).
I can’t prove a negative. If you have evidence of any of these claims, please share them. If you’re just presuming that they’re happening without evidence, that’s not something I can argue with.
You weren’t asked to.
Meh, no. I don’t need to make the effort to prove a dozen different things because you are too lazy to state whatever it is you specifically struggle to accept.
LOL I explained myself very clearly. You’re making statements of fact without any evidence. I stated that your statements are factually incorrect. Pretty simple. If you’re too lazy to back up your statements, that’s fine, and is your prerogative.
Any econ 101 book will give you the remedial knowledge you lack about how corporations function and how capitalism works generally. It’s quite basic stuff. There you go… a vague answer (go read a book) for a vague inquiry. Should be no problem w/your highly motivated posturing.
Proof that Tesla has cameras → https://web.archive.org/web/20250406045756/https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/models/en_us/GUID-682FF4A7-D083-4C95-925A-5EE3752F4865.html
I am not going to blow much time spoon feeding basic knowledge to you. Do your own homework. Come back with specific questions if you really get stuck. If you find a book covering capitalism that contradicts the principle that corps have a duty to maximise profit for the shareholders, mention the book.
Remedial knowledge of how corporations generally function is not in any way proof that OEMs can’t have cameras without surveillance.