The State of California may ban facial recognition for law enforcement.

[realpetertdm]

3 hours ago, Drak3 said:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/smog

 

You should follow your own advice, as you're not aware the difference between ash and smog. Nor do you understand the point of my comments.

Here's a different wording:

California's government might overcome its own incompetence and write legislation that is actually beneficial to the citizens.

 Can we stay on topic please

[SenKa]

23 hours ago, DrMacintosh said:

Something something.....paper straws. 

*Joins several aluminum straws in to a vaguely sword shaped object being held together with plastic straws*

 

Tree killer!

[DrMacintosh]

1 hour ago, realpetertdm said:

 Can we stay on topic please

That’s what he always does. He derails and contradicts. I don’t know why I keep unhiding his posts so I can read them. 
 

Case and point is that nowhere on the wiki page for smog does ash come up even once. But he’s still going to blame it on fires and not carbon emissions. 
 

[FezBoy]

5 hours ago, Drak3 said:

That's a load of shit. Your "smog days" were and are due to wild fires. The last significant (Bloomberg ran a 30 second warning on it) smog event was less than a year ago. There were fires so bad in Cali, that Idaho had issues last year with smog.

While the smog due to wildfires is TERRIBLE, it doesn't affect us when there are none.  There was crazy smog in LA when my grandma was a kid, even if there were no fires burning, but not it was not nearly as bad when my mom lived there.

 

Source: I live one town over from the camp fire, the most destructive fire in california history, my grandma lived in LA in the 50s, my mom lived in LA in the 90s/00s

[Drak3]

1 hour ago, Kaloob said:

Why was it a problem in areas without forest fires (think Pittsburgh), then?

Pittsburgh is a manufacturing powerhouse. California, far from it.

1 hour ago, FezBoy said:

it doesn't affect us when there are none.

California had 5000 this year.

8000 last year.

9000 in 2007.

7000 in 2016.

8700 in 2015.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_California_wildfires

 

Far cry from none.

[FezBoy]

Just now, Drak3 said:

California had 5000 this year.

8000 last year.

9000 in 2007.

7000 in 2016.

8700 in 2015.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_California_wildfires

 

Far cry from none.

Ok?  I said that if there isn't a fire then there will not be smog from fires.  I am well aware of the number of fires.

 

[Drak3]

Just now, FezBoy said:

I said that if there isn't a fire then there will not be smog from fires.

You're not going to have thousands of forest fires at the same time.

[FezBoy]

2 hours ago, Drak3 said:

You're not going to have thousands of forest fires at the same time.

Well yeah, but out of those thousands of fires in 2018, the most destructive year in California history, only had 146 fires burned more than 100 acres. (https://fire.ca.gov/incidents/2018/)  The count of "thousands of wildfires" is literally anytime a fire starts in a forest and firefighters respond.  The vast majority of these are very small fires. 

 

The amount of these has only gone up, yet somehow our smog problem isn't nearly as bad.  I wonder how that happened?

[Drak3]

4 minutes ago, Kaloob said:

Dallas-Fort worth area?

Arlington is also big on manufacturing.

The're also the Dallas/Fort Worth international airport. It's the second largest in the US.

2 minutes ago, FezBoy said:

The amount of these has only gone up, yet somehow our smog problem isn't nearly as bad.  I wonder how that happened?

California smog is going back up.

[Guest]

On 9/21/2019 at 4:19 PM, DrMacintosh said:

You should look at what happens in China before you stop caring about this stuff. 

I know all the China and Surveillance mish-mosh gets thrown around, but I feel safer in China than I do in the US. There is definitely some privacy issues of course, but these days I just feel every government is watching their citizens, I guess some are a bit more open about it. (Or rather obvious). 

 

12 hours ago, Drak3 said:

I wouldn't say that. The end result is more strain on engines, for nonexistant benefits that only work on paper.

You should take advantage of electric cars. Some good engines coming out at the moment. I've been reading good things about the new Ford F150. Keep in mind the people that make the laws know more than you. 

[Drak3]

Just now, floofer said:

Keep in mind the people that make the laws know more than you. 

1. No, they don't.
2. Even if they did, doesn't make the law beneficial to me.

[Nowak]

what's going on in this thread

[FezBoy]

22 minutes ago, Nowak said:

what's going on in this thread

Drak3 is.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Drak3 said:

1. No, they don't.
2. Even if they did, doesn't make the law beneficial to me.

1) They are. What experience do you have in political administration and legalities?

2) Laws are beneficial to the population, not a person. 

[Bitter]

1 hour ago, Drak3 said:

1. No, they don't.
2. Even if they did, doesn't make the law beneficial to me.

https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/new-nasa-images-highlight-us-air-quality-improvement/

NASA et al must  be full of idiots then. Yes, NOx comes from more than just cars but the primary creator of NOx emissions is combustion of 'fossil' fuels, so this map shows not just the reduction from tighter vehicle emissions but also the reduction from tighter power plant emissions as well as the switch from coal to gas fired power plants coming into play throughout the Eastern US. Take a close look at California, see how NOx over parts of that state also reduced dramatically during the same time period. Currently they have one operating coal fired power plant, in the past there were as many as 6 others however I'm having a hard time finding the closing dates of all of them but none were around the Bay area (nearest were in Stockton) where a dramatic drop in NOX can be seen, the nearest were in . I suspect that most of the NOx reductions in the Bay area are vehicle related.

 NOX is a contributor to ground level air pollution which causes respiratory distress in sensitive peoples and worsens already present cardio pulmonary conditions.

 

Now gas fired power plants still emit whopping amounts of NOx and are still a cause for concern and further regulation but they're cleaner than coal on a whole, NOx included.

[leadeater]

5 hours ago, FezBoy said:

Source: I live one town over from the camp fire, the most destructive fire in california history, my grandma lived in LA in the 50s, my mom lived in LA in the 90s/00s

The situation with LA in regards to smog is quite interesting as to why it is such a problem compared to other places. 

 

Quote

Los Angeles, like Denver and Mexico City, is a natural pollution trap. The surrounding mountains combine with temperature inversions to trap dirty air. Early on, smoke and fumes from steel and chemical plants, oil refineries and backyard trash incinerators – legal until the late 1950s – plagued the city.

LA is very susceptible to smog due to this.

 

Quote

No one, however, blamed the automobile at first. “People did look at tailpipes, but auto exhaust was clear and the smog was brown, so it didn’t seem like there was a direct relationship between those two things,” Elkind said.

 

“It took about 10 years for there to be concrete laboratory-proven evidence that the hydrocarbon emissions from tailpipes, when exposed to sunlight and nitrogen oxides, turned into photochemical smog.”

 

Arie Haagen-Smit, a biochemist who had been studying the flavor of pineapples at the California Institute of Technology, not only made that discovery, but fought hard to convince politicians, regulators and industry that cars were the biggest smog culprit in Los Angeles.

Any hydrocarbon that is burnt can create smog, the particular mix of emissions in car exhaust along with the total volume of it and how spread out the emissions are (cars are everywhere) makes them top the list. Sunlight is a huge factor too, learn why in video linked at the end, Photo-Chemical Smog.

 

https://www.marketplace.org/2014/07/14/la-smog-battle-against-air-pollution/

 

For LA it doesn't matter if it's cars, factories, fires, whatever it is important the total amount of burnt hydrocarbons is kept low or there will be smog because the inversions layers prevent pollution from dispersing and moving away. Also whether or not it turns in to a smog issue doesn't negate the air quality health problems, shouldn't we all want to breath clean air that isn't harmful to health?

 

What this does mean however is that different places require different emissions regulations, not all places are LA for example.

 

Not sure how any of this relates to facial recognition though, but interesting that I recently watched a video that contained information about LA smog in it (car video from Doughnut Media).

[Spotty]

- Thread Locked -

It's obvious this isn't staying on topic.