this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2025
970 points (93.2% liked)
memes
18231 readers
3023 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I mean this in a genuine way, why in your mind those are the two options available? Total anarchy without functioning transit or cameras pointing at drivers?
There are several different ways to control traffic. If privacy is an importanr factor for a culture, they'd rank privacy respecting alternatives higher.
I think the arguement is that the cameras are only there because people are running red lights. Don't you want to catch people who habitually run red lights, and therefore represent a danger to the public? If you're not the sort of person who runs the red lights then the cameras are irrelevant to you.
If it improves safety, which it's not clear red light cameras do. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/red-light-cameras-may-not-make-streets-safer/
This is the same argument as 'mass surveillance shouldn't matter if you have nothing to hide,' it's a fallacy that only considers some elements of the situation.
The way we run society is relevant for all people in it. My taxes fund maintenance of these systems. I want us to work on effective prevention not bandaid punitive systems that don't improve safety.
The SA article mentions Houston, a notoriously horrible city to drive in (concentric freeway rings, I swear). It pulled data from Texas from before 2010, and I know at least some municipalities were shortening their yellows then to encourage short stopping. It also studies changes in behavior after the punishment tool has been removed, so the drivers are already operating with years of conditioning. They even referenced the study that showed that the number of people running red lights in Virginia dropped 67% after red light cameras were installed? I need to look a little bit closer at their statistical analysis to see what confidence threshold they were using to determine that the reduction in accidents that they did see was not statistically significant, but overall I'm not that impressed by one study from a borderline pop science magazine.
Meta-analysis is the way to go.