• AmbitiousProcess (they/them)@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Or, why not just build roads that inhibit speeding

    As I already stated, doing that is not quick, easy, or cheap. Mounting a camera to a pole is much more cost effective, and quick to set up in the short term, even if it’s not the ideal long-term solution.

    They’ve been proven to reduce speed, injuries, and deaths, and there’s vanishingly few cases in which regular, non-“smart” traffic cameras operating under the technological standards I mentioned have ever been utilized for any form of surveillance that produced a measurable harm for any individual, that I could find. That is why I advocate for those, not for “smart” ones like Flock’s.

    I don’t think it should be a permanent solution, but I’d rather have speed cameras now, with road improvements later, over zero measures to prevent speeding now, with the hope that traffic calming infrastructure will be feasible and actually get done later down the line. Infrastructure isn’t free, and cameras aren’t either, but cameras are a hell of a lot cheaper.

    • Zoot@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 hours ago

      A camera is a camera, and there are no lightpole cameras that are SD Card read only with no access to the internet.

      You know what that means right? That anybody can access them if they’re smart enough? You keep reiterating the same thing while fundamentally not understanding, or choosing not to care that a camera is a camera. Don’t give up your privacy just because it’s the cheaper option.

      You clearly are fine being surveiled though so this conversation is pointless.