Edit
https://www.phillyvoice.com/philly-woman-arrested-uber-eats-robot-protest/
This article has more from and about her. Even more based than before.
You must log in or register to comment.
- one_old_coder@piefed.socialEnglish1 day
Robots in a public space have now more rights than humans. Fuck this.
- 17 hours
This got me thinking about how its illegal to ride bicycles on the sidewalk yet these little motorized carts are allowed but how?
- 21 hours
In liberal democracies property has always had more weight than human lives.
- 18 hours
That’s not specific to liberal democracies. Liberal democracies tend to be more respectful of human rights than other types of societies. As such they are constantly under attack by internal and external forces that place property before life. It seems they always succeed in bringing democracies down. But that’s not per se the fault of liberal democracies.
- 17 hours
Placing property before life is a defining feature of liberal democracies. Its the concept they are founded upon. Protecting private property is their guiding light. Bourgeois liberals will always sacrifice the lives of however many they have to in an effort to protect their property. Human rights are only allowed in so much as they allow for stability in that protection.
- 15 hours
“protecting private property is their guiding light” – that was true in ancient Egypt, Greece, Rome, China, the mediaeval feudal societies, in Nazi Germany, etc etc. Beyond small tribal societies you are hard pressed to find an example where property wasn’t more important than people. That’s true for the so called communist states too, just the property technically wasn’t private (in practice it was, no wonder oligarchs emerged from its collapse). And yes, it is true in lib democracies too, but with the added counter-idea of humab rights which most other societies lack(ed).
- 13 hours
Except its not true in a lot of your examples. Part of the reason the age of liberal revolutons took place was to secure private property rights for that Bourgeois class. To stop a king from being able to seize private property whenever they want. To stop a state from saying the state owns all of the property. You mentioned ancient greece, well think back to Athens then. When they discovered a silver mine near the city they didn’t say it should belong to the person who discovered it or the person who bought the mine, they said it should be used for the public good to build a fleet. That’s not private property. That’s a concept which would cause liberal democracies to murder people in the streets over.
- 10 hours
Nah, liberal democracies are generally partly socialist in limited but notable ways, and common property is not unusual. Nobody is massacring groups over the ideological principle of public highways, or nature preserves, or recreation centres, or national corporations. I mean, in Canada, for instance, people died due to colonialism, but that’s a different, if related story. It’s a very capitalist society with a bunch of popular collective property and “crown” (nominally state-owned) corporations.
Economic systems historically overlap. We still have shreds of feudalism hanging around.
- 1 day
I don’t think the robot has MORE rights, the question here is if it should have ANY rights.
A person is not allowed to constantly block another person either, and refuse to stop even when police order it?
I also don’t think it is allowed for a robot to constantly block a person. That would be a malfunction.
IMO if the robots can’t navigate properly to not be unnecessarily in the way, they should not be allowed. But be sure to have a phone recording of that before “retaliating”.Also, we’re not actually talking about the robot’s rights, we’re talking about the rights of a for profit company to operate their equipment. When a delivery robot goes on strike and tries to organize their workplace we should definitely talk about robots’ rights, but I don’t think that will happen anytime soon.
- 1 day
I agree, protesting and demonstrating are one thing, but you have to know when you’ve made your point and let it go. If there are that many robots traveling in that area, she can make her point briefly over and over and be more of an impact. Repeated resistance with media coverage will get others to maybe even join in, or at least don’t use a company that does it. This is a one-off where her message got lost in the question on if she pushed her rights too far.
She got notices. We’re discussing it. There will be more people doing this. She has achieved exactly what her protest sought to achieve
- 1 day
You’re probably right in retrospect. People will copy this, and it will become a problem, and the police, who are there to protect property are going to do just that. My point was just there might be better ways to do this instead of directly. Other blockade and sit-in tactics for other topics have gotten the attention they were there for, but didn’t change the actual problem. We’ll see how this goes as it gets worse.
- 24 hours
There are other ways. But better isn’t the word I’d use. There isn’t any one tactic that gets anything done. Which is why you must employ a diversity of tactics. This is part of that.
- 23 hours
It is not a one off she does it all the time and she said plans to continue doing it.
Here is a video of her from a few weeks ago.
Yeah, actually it makes sense. They are property and the pigs’ objective is to protect property.
- 11 hours
i feel for you and this poor woman. being attacked by fascist robots wherever you go
dementia is cruel
- 24 hours
wait I know her! she does this consistently here in Chinatown and on arch street by reading terminal market. always a joy to see, she’s really funny with it.
the other day I saw her manage to block one into driving over a metal grate on the sidewalk, at which point its sensors must’ve gotten confused cause it just stood there and didn’t move. I left after about 5 minutes, I wonder if someone had to come rescue it lol
According to police, Marvin repeatedly blocked the robot’s path and ignored multiple commands from officers to move.
She was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct.
Can standing in a public space legally be enforced as “disorderly conduct?”
Yes. If you’re standing in the way of a wheelchair ramp someone needs and an officer asks you multiple times to move and you don’t there should be recourse for that. I think it’s pretty standard globally to have allowances for that.
Plenty of public places are protected and/or have areas you’re not able to stand at all. Just because you’re not on someone’s private property doesn’t mean you are entitled to be there or do whatever you want there. In the US we even have a loitering regulations that don’t even require you to be specifically impeding something.
All that said, I think these robots should be more regulated and any companies using them are garbage.
I’d think that would be Obstructing public thoroughfare. Without saying the full interaction, it’s hard to say. It looks like she’s just standing in one place and it’s possible to pass on one side. It’ll be interesting to see what the lawyers decide on this one.
- 1 day
The robot couldn’t pass on either side. She’s blocking a sidewalk ramp
What even is this argument you’re trying to make?
She was given a lawrul order to move by police. She did not comply. Disorderly conduct is a very common result of that
The law is structured such that you have to follow officer instructions, even if they are unlawful. If you were given an unlawful order, your recourse is to sue the city. It’s not a great system, but it’s the American one
- 1 day
Disorderly conduct is usually written so broadly that it can be anything the police say it is.
Being charged with disorderly conduct is basicly proof you did nothing wrong. If you’d done anything actually illegal they would’ve charged you with that.
- 20 hours
You ever worked with middle-schoolers? Sometimes you need broad “don’t be an asshat” rules because otherwise some jerks will make it their life’s mission to make life hell for other people while technically not violating any rules.
- 1 day
If she kept moving to be in front of it, it’s not just standing there as you’re framing it.
She wasn’t charged with disorderly conduct for standing. She was charged with it for repeatedly moving and for ignoring officers’ commands to stop moving.
If she did that to you while you are trying to get to your office for an important meeting, how would you feel about her actions? If the robot did that to you, how upset would you be?
- 11 hours
I think it’s fair that she gets sued. Whether the arrest was really necessary I don’t know. You wouldn’t stand in front of a train or a truck and expect not getting legal problems with that. You are disrupting traffic and a legal and civil business.
If her point is, according to the article, to protest “corporations that displace human delivery workers in order to enrich their own bottom line”, I fully understand her, even if I am not convinced of her method.
Robots are awesome cool tech that could make everybody’s lifes better. But their increasing deployment must come with legal and societal guardrails. Especially, we need to develop societies worldwide such that they are prepared and have solutions for the disruption of low-skilled labour markets.
Delivery robots are just the beginning. This will continue and progressively creep up the labour skill levels.
I would love to see a world where nobody has to work, because it is no longer necessary. But jobs become increasingly ineffective as the primary wealth distribution system. Robots and AI do not pair well with present capitalistic societies. This demands fundamental systematic changes in socio-economic structures.
- 5 hours
Sidewalks are for humans. Not fucking venture tech bro scooters and fucking robots. Americans are fucking pathetic. This post is pathetic. This lady is awesome.
I can’t wait until I’m old enough to do shit like this. Not to worry about jail bc i’m old. It is going to be so much fun!
- 20 hours
I don’t get it. Were these people also sabotaging factories? Were they tearing down computers? Were they ripping up plumbing and electricity?
- 18 hours
Those inventions directly and immediately created new kinds of jobs and that was clear to everyone. Plumbing made plumbers, electricity made electricians, computers made programmers. Robots take jobs and add very few new jobs. Which people dislike, because for millenia the social contract has been that everybody has to “earn” their survival. That contract, while always disingenuous due to existence of various kinds of aristocracies and elites, has been more or less in balance due to the need for labor. This is what’s breaking now. And the two possible outcomes are either only the elites survive, or none of the elites survive.
- 12 hours
They don’t “take jobs”, they save work.
Jobs are a means to an end, not a goal in itself. Jobs are not a good thing, they are a necessary evil. Things need to be done and someone needs to do them. Once we run out of stuff that needs doing, we don’t make up new work just to keep people busy. Do you think our hunter/gatherer ancestors sent out people to gather berries when they already had more than enough just so everyone could have a ‘job’? Of course not.
Our goal should be to eleminate all jobs, or at least as many as possible. Every job that is eliminated means more free time for humans to do things that actually matter.
You are confusing needing a job with needing an income. People need incomes, they don’t need jobs. You can hand people the income without creating meaningless work for them.
It’s like those stupid fundraisers where someone does a meaningless task in order to raise money. “I’m walking from the east coast to the west coast of the US to raise money for cancer research”. Why are people requiring you do something this pointless before donating? You gain nothing by requiring this. It makes no sense.
- 6 hours
sure but in a capitalistic economy, what’s gonna happen to people that still need an income but there is no work left anyone would be willing to pay someone else an income for?
20 hoursYeah! What does this retired professor who taught a class about freedom of expression know? Such a fool!
- Pratai@piefed.caEnglish19 hours
She should know better than to waste her time doing something that would result in a pure negative. Nothing came from this. It’s a dead end that only led to her being in trouble. It was a worthless effort.
Being a professor doesn’t make you wise. It just presents the hope that they know something you don’t.
Shouldv’e kissed it and read it a bedtime story. At least that way it would be slightly positive, albeit wasteful and worthless.
- 24 hours
I agree with this woman’s cause but she is just a crazy Philly woman. If you really wanted to stop these things just kick them over and run, as it looked like she just stood in front of the bot and waited for the cops. Even better get a big ass truck drive up next to these bots scoop them up and then you got free lunch and a robot collection.
- 23 hours
The robots have tons of cameras, sensors, and tracking equipment. You would be caught very quickly if you were just trying to vandalize them
If you wanted to go that route, pretend to be on your phone and trip over it in such a way as to knock it over
If you have the resources, you can tack on a personal injury lawsuit
- 23 hours
It most definitely has “angry old man shakes fist at sky” energy around it.
