Sure, but the Waymo is taking intrusive video of much more than the inside of the car. And unlike a mast-mounted camera, it can be sent almost anywhere at almost any time.
Sure, but the Waymo is taking intrusive video of much more than the inside of the car. And unlike a mast-mounted camera, it can be sent almost anywhere at almost any time.
>Sure, but the Waymo is taking intrusive video of much more than the inside of the car.
The alternative is having a driver in the car, which is equally intrusive.
> The alternative is having a driver in the car, which is equally intrusive.
Would you rather have one random stranger see you naked, or have a video of you naked passed around to every cop in your city?
Unless you feel the same about those two scenarios, it seems like a driver and a camera are not equally intrusive.
>Would you rather have one random stranger see you naked, or have a video of you naked passed around to every cop in your city?
Half the ubers I've been now has a "you're being recorded" notice. Public transit is far worse.
You seem to have missed the point. A recording is one thing. A networked camera being ai-monitored in realtime is another.
Your uber driver is using the video to protect their in-app reputation (also dystopian, but unrelated), and in case a crime is committed against them or they are accused of one.
A networked ai monitored camera system is a panopticon. It will be (or already has been) turned against journalists, protesters, political opponents, ex girlfriends, union organizers, etc.