this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2026
462 points (98.9% liked)
Technology
88848 readers
3957 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
After looking at the Philadelphia statute for disorderly conduct I’m assuming it’s based off this:
Yeah, but standing on a sidewalk and allowing people to pass you by is not blocking anything...?
So, even if that's the case, it seems pretty weak.
I want to know WHO was she obstructing? Sidewalks are for people. Are the cops going to make sure stray animals have full access as well?
Anyone trying to navigate that section of the sidewalk.
It's still bullshit, and it's still a first amendment issue as it is a form of protest.
But standing somewhere, blocking a public space is obstructing the flow of traffic, and meets the standard. Being arrested is part and parcel of protest because legal challenges form precedent. Sometimes you want to be arrested for both visibility and that opportunity to challenge a law, or otherwise shift things.
Blocking the robot isn't the same as blocking a human. But blocking robot did block other humans. They had to navigate around it. Rubbernecking is inevitable. You've got the people interested in what she's doing and why standing there too. In terms of whether or not she violated that law, there's zero doubt she did.
And that's part of the process of changing that law, hopefully
Okay, but define standing there, and define public space, and define blocking.
Is standing in a public space for 10 minutes blocking?
What if you're standing in a line? What if you're standing, looking at a parking meter? Perhaps you're waiting for the walk sign on the road, and you're standing on the edge of the sidewalk?
Is there now a large list of exceptions? Does that mean standing in a public space where your activity is not part of the list of exceptions means you are now obstructing it?
What if you're standing in a public space, but you're a worker and are actually tasked with working on that public space? Technically, you are standing in a public space, so you are blocking it, no?
Is there some temporal element to this? If not, then are you technically blocking a public space simply by existing in that public space? If at any point you are in that public space, you are not actively moving out of that public space?
So on and so forth. This can continue forever.
The implications of something like that are pretty far-reaching, and the ambiguities are great.