you have not listened to a word i've said lmao

Ay that's a surprise at least.

You're not being realistic though. Will continue congratulating the gang for cutting these down, fairly sure some of the ycl lads have done a few, dunno about these specific ones though.

You physically can't speed with traffic calming, they will just crash and fuck up their vehicles.

This conversation is silly. Right from the start if you were committed to this fuck the poor nonsense you should have just been honest and admitted it so neither of our times would have been wasted on this ridiculous farce.

Not really that surprised, typical liberal bullshit. Gonna vote Starmer too yeah?

Ok so what do you expect to happen when you rock up to the council and say "Hi, I want to replace this speed camera making tens of thousands in profit per year with this other solution that makes no money at all" ?

Please tell me what you think the pathway to the alternative better solution is.

My point here is that for every one it fucks over, it helps other people not being fucked over, because it does do something against speeding. My line of reasoning for speed cams is not that it fucks people over, it's that it helps people. You wanna focus on the first part, I'm trying to get you to see the issue is more complex than that, at least if you include people outside of cars in your consideration.

Well my line of reasoning is that there is an alternative that fucks no poor people over, and that taking action to achieve that end us a good thing. A negative in the short term leads to a longterm positive.

Also I see no other method of doing this. If you go to the council and say "I want to replace this highly profitable traffic camera making hundreds of thousands per year with a traffic island that will make no money at all" the decision that any team will make internally is obvious. That issue inevitably leads to destruction of these cameras as the only method of causing the alternative to occur.

Ok so you finally agree that some poor people suffer because of this and that there is an alternative that exists where no poor people suffer at all?

Doing the alternative is good and taking action that leads to the alternative is good.

If you say utterly stupid ass things like poor people don't own cars I will absolutely assume you don't interact with the people struggling to survive in this country in any capacity. It's a bloody stupid thing to say mate.

I mean what I said, go and volunteer and see for yourself.

Having been to court twice for online related stuff I will absolutely couch this shit.

I do not see how that question is doing anything but attempting some sort of gotcha or accusation that these people deserve to be fucked over instead of have real designs that don't result in their lives being made harder. It seems like spite to me.

Sure, but you're arguing for like instant speed camera abolishment or destruction here, aye?

As a means of discouraging their construction in the first place and the harm they do to the poor I am defending the person who did this.

I am not advocating anyone do anything illegal.

The process and length of time it takes for either option are practically the same. It's irrelevant. Not to mention a traffic island costs like £3k while a camera costs £85k (guess why they pick the camera despite the price).

Bus, train or taxi.

It literally says in this article that one of the cameras mentioned has clocked 17,000 people. Of course they have money to do it. Croydon council responded to FOI request stating it costs £2.5-£3.5k to install traffic islands. The cost of a speed camera installation on the other hand is £85,000 according to Bedford Council, with a £5000 annual upkeep cost.

The cost of physical redesign traffic calming measures is significantly cheaper to install than the cameras, whose cost is justified by councils because of the income they bring in thereafter.

The insistence on replacing it instead of doing something else is being justified internally because even with these attacks they consider it to be making more than it's costing them.

Poor people aren't getting screwed over by this because poor people can't afford to drive,

Mate fuck right off. This statement just screams that you've never actually done any organising or volunteering with the poor in the UK. Please volunteer at a food bank for once in your fucking life and learn what kinds of people the 3million people in this country attending them are like. It will surprise you, expand your view of society a bit, and you'll be doing an actually-good useful thing.

We live in material reality, not a fantasy in your head. Justifying bullshit that specifically fucks over the poor while not really affecting the rich (because fines are just fees you pay to break the law when you're rich enough for them to be minor inconveniences) with what amounts to Cartman screaming RESPECT MAH AUTHORITAH is bullshit. You want people to actually slow down? Redesign the road.

This praxis does two things, it prevents the poor being fucked over if these are just there to make council money, or it causes them to give up on the camera and properly redesign the road when it's actually about real safety concerns.

Given this has happened before and they only replaced the camera I'm siding with "it's for council income not actual safety". If they do it again I feel doubley vindicated in that opinion. If it's actually about real safety concerns they'll give up on the camera and add in pedestrian refuge islands to slow traffic instead. Love these badboys

Eh? This is nowhere near Newport and it's not a motorway either.

I couldn't care less. These cameras exist entirely to make councils money. When they actually want traffic slowed they redesign the road properly with traffic islands.

Destroying these cameras is a good thing. It either fucks over council revenue sources that mainly fuck the poor while affecting the rich not one bit, or it results in getting actual redesigns of the roads properly because they do actually want that road to be safer.

This method is a little extreme though tbh we usually just chuck paint on them. This one is tall in order to make that less viable it seems.

TL;DR: If you do incriminating stuff, you should be incriminated.

Boot tasty.

Lmao cutting down speed cameras is praxis. Jog on. These things are just there to make local councils money.

When they actually want a slower road they put speed bumps or traffic islands on it.

Chatgpt is just Cortana with better marketing. AI isn't smart, it's just algorithms producing a facsimile of language via pattern heatmaps. What was Cortana if not just an earlier version of the same thing?

""AI"" is all a techbro marketing bubble. Will burst and move on eventually.

Like holy shit we had the autofill feature in Photoshop ages and ages ago and that's just doing what the "intelligent" image generators do. We didn't call it AI back then. All marketing for what amounts to just some interesting algorithms.

Rebranded Cortana?

Destined to fail.

getting offended by it really isn’t helping your case

Holy shit you're actually like "getting offended by transphobia is not a good luck for trans people".

What a tool.