From: mark@unicorn.com
Date: Mon Dec 14 1998 - 13:04:28 MST
den Otter [neosapient@geocities.com] wrote:
>ROTFL. Right, of course a sentient witness *can* be trusted.
Uh-huh... and when exactly did I say that they could? No, I didn't say
that, did I, actually? I said that non-sentient witnesses couldn't be
trusted. Yet people like you would throw out a hundred witness statements
if you had a faked video which showed a fake crime.
>In other words, no matter how flawed automated (video) surveillance
>may be,
In the last year or so, I've had my photo taken by one red-light
camera while driving through a green light, and two speed-cameras while
driving at 30mph in a 30mph limit. Living in an authoritarian surveillance
state I have a very different opinion on the infallibility of automated
systems; luckily either those cameras were out of film or some sentient
worked out that they were fucked up, otherwise I'd have lost my driving
license without commiting any crime.
Mark
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:50:00 MST