this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2026
197 points (99.0% liked)

Privacy

5819 readers
393 users here now

Welcome! This is a community for all those who are interested in protecting their privacy.

Rules

PS: Don't be a smartass and try to game the system, we'll know if you're breaking the rules when we see it!

  1. Be civil and no prejudice
  2. Don't promote big-tech software
  3. No apathy and defeatism for privacy (i.e. "They already have my data, why bother?")
  4. No reposting of news that was already posted
  5. No crypto, blockchain, NFTs
  6. No Xitter links (if absolutely necessary, use xcancel)

Related communities:

Some of these are only vaguely related, but great communities.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cecinestpasunecommunication@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

The entire concept of laws is insane delusional anti-materialism.

I'm not going to spend time on the inequities of punishment, the inefficacy of punishment (we're still punishing people for murder! Tons of them! Every year! Can you name a culture where its generally legal? I fucking can't!), the necessary selection and injustice of enforcement when trying to impose an often complex abstract ideal on reality through brute violence which is itself usually contradictory, the history of law as excuse, the inherent injustice of violence, or the problem brought up in this thread of variance between jurisdictions of law being used to exploit. Those are all issues that require volumes to fully understand or you've already picked a side on and its not worth arguing.

I'm just going to point out that if the goal was preventing bad thing, we would focus on training education infrastructure and constantly refined best practices to help us achieve the desired (lack of) result. That is what works. We know that's what works, because in the places where there's no power over others to be gained, or where the result is the most important to the powerful, that's what we've done for over a century, arguably for millennia, across every border and language and nearly every religion. It is in fact the foundation of modern safety, infields as diverse as architecture and medicine, where procedures and design conventions are optimized to reduce room for error without reducing the agency of practitioners. Things like hoses for different parts of general anesthesia being different sizes and the switches being linked in an appropriate gear ratio, doctors signing areas to be operated on before a surgery, or railings being built over long falls anywhere a person the system cares about might ever stand.

If people –especially kids– getting where they're going –especially school– safely and quickly were the priority, we would be building trains and getting cars off the use, with constant robust well maintained professional busses as a bridge to get us there. We don't do that. We build more highways and more cars to the exclusion of all that.

The idea that anyone thinks laws are a good tool for avoiding bad outcomes is endlessly frustrating. They're not in the top ten in use today, and that's not even what they're fucking for. That's like arguing I should use a floppy silicone dildo to put a screw into a hole while we're standing in the middle of a fully stocked hardware lending library. It was funny the first few times; now I just want to scream.

[–] Shellofbiomatter@lemmus.org 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I do agree with your core idea and yeah we should work towards it, but in the meanwhile we cant ignore current reality either. It will take generations to unroot car centric worldview towards public transport and more people centric worldview and building said infrastructure takes time as well.

In the meanwhile there are people who ignore rules for their own benefit or just not caring and threat of an imminent punishment does reduce the amount of rule breaking until we can get to the society where the punishment is no longer necessary. Yes it's not perfect, it's just a patchwork solution and the efficacy of it can be questionable.

Like the current subject of full on surveillance camera is probably one of the worst and most exploitative ways to get the desired results, but at the same time. It can be rapidly implemented and will scare some people into more careful driving even if just around the bus. Though i assume there probably are some less invasive methods that can be rapidly implemented and will have a similar results, if even necessary at all as i don't have the data regarding how regular this occurance is.

[–] cecinestpasunecommunication@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

If your goal is avoiding bad outcomes, you change the environment to avoid bad outcomes.

Even outside eliminating cars, things like sharp curbs and physically protected bike lanes save lives, especially children's lives. If the goal were saving the lives of children, you do that first. Instead, over my lifetime, I have seen these things disappearing. Literally becoming more dangerous.

I know you think you're arguing in good faith, but you are a puppet of some seriously malevolent mother fuckers who will endanger children for profit and an excuse to fuck my privacy. Yours too, if you care. Don't tolerate a hand up your ass without at least a little foreplay.

[–] Shellofbiomatter@lemmus.org 1 points 3 hours ago

I completely agree with you and yes it's a constant struggle against drivers and politicians catering to them to get anything that's even remotely pedestrian friendly.

The other person out of curiosity did ask the reasoning behind it and i can give one, even though it's from a positive perspective which isn't that accurate for the reason why those cameras have been implement. That doesn't mean that i support it, in every response iv said how those cameras have become the worst ways to control traffic, but i can't deny the beneficial effect of traffic cameras. Those do work, with a huge cost to privacy.
I've just seen too many drivers slowing down to speed limit when a map says a traffic camera is coming up. Same on intersections, it reduces how many drivers try to slip over when it's "orange"(just turned red). Similar around police (excluding the corruption argument), people start to behave better. So imminent threat of a punishment does have a positive, even if limited, effect.