AI cameras being set up on highways to catch drivers who throw trash out of their car windows::The decision to install cameras in UK lay-bys aims to prevent littering but one campaign group described the approach as “meaningless.”
Gee, I’m sure there aren’t any national security ulterior motives…
Too bad “national security” could also mean “got an abortion”
If they can invent a traffic camera that can determine if someone got an abortion, I’d be pretty impressed. Terrified, but impressed.
:\
Comment ingested into national LLM; feature request added to backlog.
I don’t believe the United Kingdom has an issue with people getting an abortion. Clearly you didn’t read the article or the body of OP’s post.
That’s because they loosely interpret the law so they can get an abortion for “mental health”. This makes up roughly 98% of abortions. Someone could decide to challenge it since it’s technically illegal from the Offences Against the Person Act 1861
Info taken from here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_Kingdom
Here’s the summary for the wikipedia article you mentioned in your comment:
**Abortion in the United Kingdom is de facto available under the terms of the Abortion Act 1967 in Great Britain and the Abortion (Northern Ireland) (No. 2) Regulations 2020 in Northern Ireland. The procurement of an abortion remains a criminal offence in Great Britain under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, although the Abortion Act provides a legal defence for both the pregnant woman and her doctor in certain cases. Although a number of abortions did take place before the 1967 Act, there have been around 10 million abortions in the United Kingdom. Around 200,000 abortions are carried out in England and Wales each year and just under 14,000 in Scotland; the most common reason cited under the ICD-10 classification system for around 98% of all abortions is "risk to woman’s mental health. "Across the United Kingdom, abortion is permitted on the grounds of:
risk to the life of the pregnant woman; preventing grave permanent injury to her physical or mental health; risk of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children of her family (up to a term limit of 24 weeks of gestation); or substantial risk that, if the child were born, they would “suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped”. The third ground is typically interpreted liberally with regards to mental health to create a de facto elective abortion service; 98% of the approximately quarter-million abortions performed in Great Britain are done so for that reason.**
I did miss the UK part. Shame on me.
I’m just not convinced that there is one government out there that doesn’t spy on its people one way or another.
They’ll never ever give up the ability to collect intel on its own people, but we can sure put up a fight and hold them off as best we can.
Wonder how the founding fathers would feel about this, but kinda expect just to find out they were doing the same thing but with physical people/spies
Who are the UKs founding fathers? King Arthur and his knights?
If you were going to consider the UK monarchy in it’s most recent form, you’d go back to the Norman invasion of 1066 and King William the Conqueror.
Most of the big land owners in the UK to this day can be traced back to the Norman conquest.
If you were going to consider the UK in its modern parliamentary form, you’d go back to the English civil war (1642-1651) where Oliver Cromwell overthrew King Charles I.
I was applying the story to the states who also share a problem in this, sorry for the confusion
They were part of the capitalist class. Aside from being extremely confused about the tech, they’d most likely support it.
A man in a tower with a spy glass who can remember every location and identity of every person they see. Yeah, they’d eat that shit up.
Did you read the article at all?
Regardless, this shouldn’t come as a surprise; the UK has been a surveillance state, at a minimum, for decades.
Origin of the term Big Brother
Yes, and I was asking a tangential question which was most prevalent to my own experiences and living situation.
The states have a very similar problem with law enforcement and placing their own cameras all over too. If anyone needs reference check out these Flock cameras.
Cameras can already read plates, it’s not that difficult via machine learning
Yo, I hate litter and hate litter bugs even more, but this is the worst way to approach it.
Just put a bounty on litter bugs using dashcam footage. $100. Watch it get fixed overnight.
I’m all for this. You have no idea how many I catch inadvertently with my dash cam!
One time, some lady driving in front of me threw a deck of playing cards out the window one by one!
Snitches get riches
They sell it like this, “just to catch the littering people, we all hate litter and nobody here would oppose that, right?” but the actual reasons they want these are a lot worse.
It’s the same reason you’re seeing that “Sweet Caroline” AI commercial constantly with the child’s voiceover.
the actual reasons they want these are a lot worse.
What is the actual reason?
This is one path that’s commonly discussed, https://time.com/6184111/abortion-surveillance-tech-tracking/
Didn’t take a strong imagination to think about how they can profile and take advantage of a tool like this - why do you think they wanted it turned off/destroyed in Batman?
The camera are already there. They use AI as a mechanism to of auto-detecting the act.
The cameras would be able to automatically send the images to enforcers, meaning officers would no longer have to look through hours of CCTV footage, the publication added.
Should fine the people camping out in the fast lane
Right lane… This is the UK.
Ah updated to fast lane
Good. Now go get my wife who lobs lit ciggies.
Might be time for an AI Wife
God I’d shove the entire U.S Navy up my ass for an AI wife that lobs cigarettes at me.
I never thought about that as a romantic story before… but here we are.
After reading headline I expected this to happen in US…
Sounds like it’ll hit poor people the hardest so I guarantee it.
They can choose not to litter?
I’m all for debilitating fines for littering. I can’t walk ONE single street without seeing garbage on the side of it. These people who litter need to be held accountable, and if they get fined so be it. Maybe they’ll think twice next time before being a garbage human being
Just saying, great use of AI. /s
Could’ve used it to detect drunk drivers, egregious moving violations, monitor movements of suspects, estimate emissions from traffic. Nope. Gotta crack down on lazy people.
They can’t stop piles of flytipping but they can do this. Jokes.
Fly tipping? I’ve never heard of that. Doesn’t sound as effective as cow tipping. I mean, the fly is just gonna fly. Plus if you tip it, it wouldn’t make a nice satisfying thud.
Cow tipping isn’t real. No way anyone can push over half a ton of moo. It’s a wierd urban myth. (From the guy who ruins jokes)
You don’t need to be pushy at all. A cow does what they are paid to do. It doesn’t matter if you tip them or not. But if you tip them, they might go into hiding until the coast is clear. Or they might go into the coast and get great surt depending on what sort of tip you gave them. You could tip them with a dollar or by hand or with a large truck or with some secret information about the police or maybe with the most awesome surfing spot. But no matter how you tip a cow, 😜🐄 it’s always funny.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
AI cameras are being set up on some UK highways to stop drivers from throwing trash out of their car windows.
The AI-powered cameras will be installed in British lay-bys in the coming weeks in an attempt to catch drivers who litter, The Metro reported.
The initiative is being run as part of a trial by National Highways, a body that was set up to maintain and improve major roads.
The cameras would be able to automatically send the images to enforcers, meaning officers would no longer have to look through hours of CCTV footage, the publication added.
The Clean Up Britain campaign group said in February that it would pursue legal action against the National Highways body if the litter situation didn’t improve.
John Read, Clean Up Britain’s founder, told The Telegraph the latest approach was another “meaningless partnership” that sounded good but “always delivered no results.”
The original article contains 283 words, the summary contains 148 words. Saved 48%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
