theneverfox

not really. you don't want to keep frames without movement, faces or license plates. then you can throw away most frames from a 60 FPS recording. 2 frames per second is better than nothing for running a portable surveillance station. then you can encode them in some efficient format with acceptable compression, and it's not that much anymore. massive 5G rollout was explicitly happening for IoT devices, to be able to handle the load.

Let's do some order of magnitude math... Let's say each car on average "sees" 100 things a day (which is very conservative since there's multiple cameras and with basic object recognition you're going to have a lot of false duplicates). Let's say each picture is cropped to a megabyte with compression, which would be pretty low res to grab identifying information from

You can't do much in the way of video compression, because this isn't a video - we're cropping pictures, too much will change frame to frame

So 100MB a day per car, that's nothing... For one car. How many cars are doing this? 10 million? 50 million?

(Oh, and btw 5G is basically just 4G or 3G outside of Metro areas in the US)

debatable. google picasa had pretty good on-device facial recognition more than a decade ago, on average desktop computer hardware. ente.io runs something similar in their smartphone app today, fully locally. detects faces very well even in memes. tech that can go into a smartphone can go into any smart car too, and likely does.

It detects faces well, that's easy enough, and it can generally label the people because you only have so many in the pool of subjects. If you want to identify people in a population? You're not doing that on a phone. Even the best systems have a big problem with false matches

that's a wrong question. the correct question is what percent of the time is a car outside of the garage. lots of cars are parked on the street all the time while not driving.

Parking lots are not usually good vantage points... That's where most cars live

And as for disparate data points... Unless ever auto company is using the same system, it's going to take non negligible amounts of work to integrate different systems. Palantir is probably going after the lower hanging and more juicy fruit, like Ring doorbells and commercial security systems. Or, you know, phones

That's what it comes down to. All this for what? I'm not saying they wouldn't do it, or it couldn't be done, I'm saying there's better options that they are already using for surveillance

If they were to do it, you'd pick Tesla - they have the cameras and sell monitoring as a feature. They're reasonably widespread, so you'll get almost the same coverage as if all automakers were on board - remember, this is about tracking people and vehicles, if we're recording them we're in a whole different ballpark

Or, you know, set up 100k cameras at key intersections and get a more comprehensive system with a lot less moving pieces

Haha I actually was curious how it came to be after your comment, but didn't get around to looking it up myself. Neat

Pictures are expensive (data wise), and on-device facial identification is not very accurate, especially at a distance in a variable environment

Cameras inside the vehicle? Those might be worth mining for data. You can easily detect if there's a person in frame, and snapshot all the passengers. Insurance and law enforcement would be interested in that

Cameras outside? You could search for human faces or license plates and upload them off peak hours... But how much is that information valuable? What percent of the time is a car even driving? Is palantir even set up to ingest that kind of disparate moving data sources?

Flock cameras just yield much more useful data... They're designed to sit somewhere and capture those pictures. Even if public outcry gets them removed, they're just going to wait until the public gets bored and then put up less noticeable cameras... We really need to fight this forever

All that being said, I have a car with no cameras and I'd only budge on that if the car reliably could drive itself. I don't like having cameras pointed at me

You're right, I was thinking of play dough

It's natural gas as opposed to coal gas - if you heat coal in an anerobic environment, it is refined into a flammable liquid + gas. Fun little science demonstration

They used to use it for lights everywhere, and it left soot all over the walls. Silly putty was invented to clean it off of wallpapers, but then they added dye and it became silly

I don't have a problem rebranding it as fossil gas, but the name natural wasn't green washing. It did occur naturally, and it is a hell of a lot cleaner than what was used before

And number 4, I do not need to be sent an amber alert from two counties over. And because they're usually not nearby, they're super annoying, and tend to contain very little information that I cannot retrieve...

I just dismiss them. I don't know all the car models, and I'm going to forget the color the moment I stop reading it

What they should do is make them undismissable notifications with a short unique chime, that way they can also dismiss them when they're no longer active

And only show them if you're in a certain geofence that could be expanded over time... If I know a kid is missing down the street, I'd actually take a look around. If it stays to for more than a few minutes, I might look up the model of the car and keep an eye out

And if they sent a pic of that model of the car, I might recognize it

What you're saying is more consistent, but I don't think it's more readable

I'm fine with let or var...if the compiler is going to infer the type thats all well and good. But it's a replacement for the type - why would you write both? It should be either or

And if the type is being inferred, the next thing I want to know is where it came from. That tells you the type and more, I don't want to have to see a type name that may or may not be there

Counter argument - putting the type first makes it easier to see where it is declared. Which is more important than the name or the type

The government job is to reign in out of control elements, like companies releasing products bad for mental health

This isn't about parenting because the goal is not about children. It's about surveillance and control, not even for the government but for a class of technocrats who found a way to subvert democracy

Good job boing

Don't worry, we can't bail them out this time. There's just not enough money, each bailout is exponentially bigger than the last one and this time the bubble is bigger than the rest of the global economy

We'll probably destroy the global economy buying them just a few more months anyways though

Not exactly secret or illegal, they are actively selling driving data to insurance companies already. Stuff like speeding, hard breaking, etc.

It's not widely advertised, but it's less secret and more "hidden in the fine print". It's right there in the open though