Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Technology is about to accelerate. Because Chevron deference is over

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 43 posts

Re: Technology is about to accelerate. Because Chevron deference is over

#21

Post by hanniabu »

jkic47 wrote: post #18
hanniabu wrote: post #3

It's important to note that balajis is anti-regulation, so his bias points out all the downsides of Chevron while ignoring the benefits.

It is even more important to note that the relationship between Companies and Regulators is not always confrontational. Our interests align more often than not (anecdote below). However, regulators occasionally overstep, and this decision allows Companies to challenge such oversteps. I once ran a chemical plant and we partnered with the state to reduce emissions to single-digit parts per billion levels (from parts pe…

> They were completely aware that this was a difficult problem to solve, expensive, and technically challenging.

And it's also a responsibility you take on in starting a company with a byproduct that (I'm assuming) is toxic.

Re: Technology is about to accelerate. Because Chevron deference is over

#22

Post by jaybrendansmith »

lupusreal wrote: post #2

This argument hinges on the premise of regulators not being able to make up new rules anymore. However this isn't the case, they can still do that. The difference is now you can more effectively challenge those rules in federal courts. But to challenge regulators in federal court will still require a lot of legal resources, which means small guys will still be effectively bound by the rules but large companies will b…

Great point. Our problem is not big government. It's big corporation. This will only make it worse for the little guy, easier for the big guy, harder for the regulators, and harder for the people. This ruling will slow down competition and innovation and break both good and bad regulations across the board. This ruling is vehemently anti-citizen, pro-corporation. Government by the people vs government by the big faceless org.

Re: Technology is about to accelerate. Because Chevron deference is over

#23

Post by jkic47 »

hanniabu wrote: post #21
jkic47 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is even more important to note that the relationship between Companies and Regulators is not always confrontational. Our interests align more often than not (anecdote below). However, regulators occasionally overstep, and this decision allows Companies to challenge such oversteps. I once ran a chemical plant and we partnered with the state to reduce emissions to single-digit parts per billion levels (from parts pe…

> They were completely aware that this was a difficult problem to solve, expensive, and technically challenging. And it's also a responsibility you take on in starting a company with a byproduct that (I'm assuming) is toxic.

As with most things, it can be more nuanced than your comment suggests.

At the time this chemical was introduced, the hazards were not known to science. Over the decades, scientists began outlining the effects of this chemical on humans and the environment.

Once industry was able to study those findings and convince ourselves that this was a real problem, we adapted our operations to mitigate those harms.

Most industries in the US work pretty hard to keep our employees and environments safe, for self preservation, if for nothing else. I breathe the same air as my employees do, after all.

Most regulatory agencies are aware that dangerous chemicals have legitimate uses. The problem statement is how to balance those uses against the known hazards. They (mostly) find a sensible balance, but sometimes, they get taken over by leaders who push it too far in one direction or another. Overturning Chevron allows adjudication to reset the balance and that should be seen as a good thing.

Re: Technology is about to accelerate. Because Chevron deference is over

#24

Post by glimshe »

stavros wrote: post #9

I find it interesting how the culture in the US is to chastize China for its "anything goes" policies when it comes to entrepreneurship, while simultaneously lamenting how regulation kills innovation. You kind of can't both say "damn those Chinese for not respecting IP and stealing my hard work" and also "I don't want regulation, I want to be able to do whatever I want". Or do you not consider IP protection laws regu…

I don't think the "US culture" criticizes China for their entrepreneurship. You hear criticisms against their totalitarian state, cheap goods, IP theft (as you mention) and the transfer of US jobs to China, but the average American doesn't think about their policies and their relation to free enterprise. You probably heard that from a loud minority and assumed it's representative of the country.

I also don't think most pro-business advocates will say that they want no laws or regulation of any kind. Business need the enforcement of contract laws, trademark laws and, yes, intellectual property laws to function. Most pro-business people aren't defending anarchy. The criticism regarding regulation is about excessive regulation which, more often than not, exists to benefit certain parties (established businesses, compliance equipment and service providers) over others (new and small businesses).

Re: Technology is about to accelerate. Because Chevron deference is over

#25

Post by stavros »

glimshe wrote: post #24
stavros wrote: post #9

I find it interesting how the culture in the US is to chastize China for its "anything goes" policies when it comes to entrepreneurship, while simultaneously lamenting how regulation kills innovation. You kind of can't both say "damn those Chinese for not respecting IP and stealing my hard work" and also "I don't want regulation, I want to be able to do whatever I want". Or do you not consider IP protection laws regu…

I don't think the "US culture" criticizes China for their entrepreneurship. You hear criticisms against their totalitarian state, cheap goods, IP theft (as you mention) and the transfer of US jobs to China, but the average American doesn't think about their policies and their relation to free enterprise. You probably heard that from a loud minority and assumed it's representative of the country. I also don't think mo…

Yes, but being against excessive anything is a tautology, as "excessive" by definition means "too much". The question is "how much is too much", and the bar is much lower in the US than in Europe.

Re: Technology is about to accelerate. Because Chevron deference is over

#26

Post by nine_k »

hapticmonkey wrote: post #5

The examples are so horrendous I thought it was satire. I can’t wait for genome, cryptocurrency, and nuclear power startups to “move fast and break things” and screw up so badly and remind us why we had these regulations to begin with.

Horrendous?

Is 23 And Me supplying you with an analysis of your genome horrendous? Giving medical advice based on that while not being an MD might be a wrong thing, but that's not what's discussed, and it is regulated differently.

Crypto currencies may be a wrong and dangerous thing (paying for stolen goods and hit jobs, etc), but KYC rules are not derived from the Chevron ruling.

Nuclear safety is indeed important, but forcing nuclear power stations to lower their radiation levels below the natural background levels of places like Denver, CO does not seem reasonable, but does seem like an undue burden.

Re: Technology is about to accelerate. Because Chevron deference is over

#27

Post by nine_k »

hanniabu wrote: post #17
lupusreal wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NRC (and most other regulatory bodies) predate Chevron deference, so you should count on them sticking around and still doing their thing. A nuclear startup could try taking them to court to circumvent all their rules and build naked nuclear piles in residential neighborhoods or something, but even if they got a federal judge to go along with that, it should be an easy political win for legislators to smack it do…

> it should be an easy political win for legislators to smack it down with some new more specific laws. Which is a lengthy process and relies on Congress actually being effective and free of corruption, which they aren't.

While agencies may be faster, are they, in general, more effective and less corrupt?

Re: Technology is about to accelerate. Because Chevron deference is over

#28

Post by piva00 »

nine_k wrote: post #26
hapticmonkey wrote: post #5

The examples are so horrendous I thought it was satire. I can’t wait for genome, cryptocurrency, and nuclear power startups to “move fast and break things” and screw up so badly and remind us why we had these regulations to begin with.

Horrendous? Is 23 And Me supplying you with an analysis of your genome horrendous? Giving medical advice based on that while not being an MD might be a wrong thing, but that's not what's discussed, and it is regulated differently. Crypto currencies may be a wrong and dangerous thing (paying for stolen goods and hit jobs, etc), but KYC rules are not derived from the Chevron ruling. Nuclear safety is indeed important,…

> Is 23 And Me supplying you with an analysis of your genome horrendous?

No, but forever storing it, cross-matching it with others, and eventually leaking this data is horrendous.

If 23 And Me was just a genome analysis for preventive healthcare company you wouldn't be citing it because that's not "exciting" enough but it'd be as useful as it can be without the harmful side of collecting this biometric data at such scale.

Re: Technology is about to accelerate. Because Chevron deference is over

#29

Post by nine_k »

piva00 wrote: post #28
nine_k wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Horrendous? Is 23 And Me supplying you with an analysis of your genome horrendous? Giving medical advice based on that while not being an MD might be a wrong thing, but that's not what's discussed, and it is regulated differently. Crypto currencies may be a wrong and dangerous thing (paying for stolen goods and hit jobs, etc), but KYC rules are not derived from the Chevron ruling. Nuclear safety is indeed important,…

> Is 23 And Me supplying you with an analysis of your genome horrendous? No, but forever storing it, cross-matching it with others, and eventually leaking this data is horrendous. If 23 And Me was just a genome analysis for preventive healthcare company you wouldn't be citing it because that's not "exciting" enough but it'd be as useful as it can be without the harmful side of collecting this biometric data at such s…

But won't a preventive healthcare company be subject to these same risks of cross-matching and leaking?

Also, not that 23 And Me were secretive about all that, they advertised the cross-matching before you order the kit, and data leak risks is something one should automatically consider when sharing any private data with anyone at all.'

If there is any harm done, it's not in telling people how much Neanderthal DNA they have, and not even in cross-matching them when they voluntarily sign up for that.

Re: Technology is about to accelerate. Because Chevron deference is over

#30

Post by lupusreal »

stavros wrote: post #20
lupusreal wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"US culture" is not one person and comprises of many people who frequently disagree with each other vehemently. "US culture" simultaneously says that baseball is better than football and football is better than baseball. That's not a contradiction because it's different people saying those things.

Yes, I hear that argument whenever anyone says anything about more than one person. I don't care much for that argument because it basically denies that culture exists by saying "different people have different preferences". Sure, they do, but also it's clearly true to say "the US culture is against regulation" and "the EU culture is for regulation". Plus, I don't even think it's that hard to find people who dislike…

It's not "denying that culture exists", it's refuting your erroneous and unreasonable expectation that culture should be consistent as though it were a person (even though individual people are themselves frequently inconsistent!)
Post reply on HN