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

NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 342 posts

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#251

Post by vlovich123 »

Waterluvian wrote: post #237
noisy_boy wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lo and behold, the airlines have started classifying almost every delay and cancellation as a safety issue Then the regulators should be asking why there are so many safety issues? Seems like by the airlines' own admission, this is a perfect ground for a full investigation and penalties in case the issues are found to be misclassified under the category of safety.

You need to be very very very careful not to disincentivize people declaring safety issues. They should really just unwind the wrong incentive and handle it differently.

Random spot checks of declared safety incidents + serious penalties for fraud (which this is if the companies are lying about safety incidents to avoid paying out compensation) is probably sufficient without changing any regulations in any meaningful way. No regulation is perfect but it’s quite surprising how effective regulations become when you start spot checking whether everyone is being honest.

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#252

Post by Waterluvian »

vlovich123 wrote: post #251
Waterluvian wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to be very very very careful not to disincentivize people declaring safety issues. They should really just unwind the wrong incentive and handle it differently.

Random spot checks of declared safety incidents + serious penalties for fraud (which this is if the companies are lying about safety incidents to avoid paying out compensation) is probably sufficient without changing any regulations in any meaningful way. No regulation is perfect but it’s quite surprising how effective regulations become when you start spot checking whether everyone is being honest.

Are you describing what food agencies do with their pseudorandom inspections? Because indeed those seem to work very well at a relatively low cost.

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#253

Post by vlovich123 »

Waterluvian wrote: post #252
vlovich123 wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Random spot checks of declared safety incidents + serious penalties for fraud (which this is if the companies are lying about safety incidents to avoid paying out compensation) is probably sufficient without changing any regulations in any meaningful way. No regulation is perfect but it’s quite surprising how effective regulations become when you start spot checking whether everyone is being honest.

Are you describing what food agencies do with their pseudorandom inspections? Because indeed those seem to work very well at a relatively low cost.

Sure that’s one example but I think there’s various things like this. You have to make sure that investigators can also be made undercover where makes sense (if it’s possible to obfuscate malfeasance) and rotate the inspector’s physical location (to avoid potential for corruption due to personal relationships). You always still have other corruption vectors (eg getting buddy buddy with the inspector’s boss and influencing them indirectly). It’s an unsolved problem but you can always do better than nothing.

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#254

Post by ericmay »

danaris wrote: post #210
ericmay wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The free market at work also generated the airlines and travel industry that so many enjoy. We created the FAA and other entities to regulate the market participants to make sure we get the outcome we desire while balancing generating economic activity. If something isn’t working right, it’s the responsibility of regulators to fix the problem, or ultimately the people to elect representatives who will. This casual cy…

> This casual cynicism regarding markets is dangerous and infectious because instead of focusing on fixing problems that have solutions via the levers of government, people give up completely and then nothing is ever made better. I don't think this follows, and I think it's because you're missing a piece of what's going on here. You seem to be coming to this from a perspective of " obviously , a healthy system has a…

> If you feel like you're seeing a lot of cynicism directed at "free markets", this is likely why: it's a reaction against these extremely vocal "drown-government-in-a-bathtub" types.

Yea but that’s bad because it’s unsophisticated and it also creates people who start to believe that the market mechanic is a bad thing or the source of their problems, when it’s not. This creates bad ideas, cynicism because you can’t take action against this invisible market, or people lose interest in participating in government.

> The other problem, of course, is that as I said, the two are often called "free markets" interchangeably without clarification, which leads to much confusion.

That’s the fault of the author.

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#255

Post by orangepurple »

pibechorro wrote: post #246
noisy_boy wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lo and behold, the airlines have started classifying almost every delay and cancellation as a safety issue Then the regulators should be asking why there are so many safety issues? Seems like by the airlines' own admission, this is a perfect ground for a full investigation and penalties in case the issues are found to be misclassified under the category of safety.

And regulators all the way down.. regulations seldom work without unintended consequences and people finding loopholes or blackmarkets. They do more harm than good.

They may do harm, significant harm, but it is unfair to categorically claim that the harm is greater than the good.

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#256

Post by ceejayoz »

jtc331 wrote: post #250
ceejayoz wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia continues to have a dismal aviation safety record. The West has largely regulated away airline crashes - the last in the US was in 2009, and it's down 95% in fatalities-per-passenger in the last two decades or so. Stuff like the 1500 hour rule certainly weren't industry initiatives.

The 1500 hour rule didn’t improve safety, and, in fact was applied as supposed remedy in response to a pilot-error caused crash in which the pilot had well more than the 1500 hours of flight time.

> The 1500 hour rule didn’t improve safety

That’s hard to assess on an individual level, especially with how rare crashes are today; confidently stating it did nothing is hard to support. On a collective level, the impact of the entire set of regulations on safety is very clear.

> was applied as supposed remedy

No. The post-Buffalo changes included some direct changes like the rules on pilot fatigue. They also included some proactive changes like the 1500 rule.

We don’t have to wait for a crash to make things safer.

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#257

Post by nemo44x »

armada651 wrote: post #227
nemo44x wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s such a weird thing to not vote for someone for. I mean, I get it - it’s a principled stance and all. But you should never vote on principal. You should vote to win so that the real issues you care about are reified. Principal could make you feel good but you still lost. Winning is the only thing that matters.

That kind of cynical thinking is exactly what broke US democracy. Winning at any cost even to the detriment of society as a whole.

It’s from the book “Rules for Radicals” and has been a major part of progressive activists strategy for over 60 years. It works.

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#258

Post by nemo44x »

namuol wrote: post #242
nemo44x wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s such a weird thing to not vote for someone for. I mean, I get it - it’s a principled stance and all. But you should never vote on principal. You should vote to win so that the real issues you care about are reified. Principal could make you feel good but you still lost. Winning is the only thing that matters.

> Winning is the only thing that matters. …assuming you trust the system to enact policies you care about. Punishing the act of disingenuously eroding trust in the system for political gain isn’t just a matter of principal but a clear long term strategy. Believe it or not there’s another election cycle after this one.

Next election cycle? Who cares, it will be forgotten by the next news cycle. Keep winning to keep getting your desired outcomes.

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#259

Post by busterarm »

seanw444 wrote: post #9
spritefs wrote: post #2

tl;dr Kathy Hochul sabotaged the version of the bill passed by the state legislature so that it requires only what Apple and Samsung are already doing The version that came out of the legislature would have required OEMs to sell individual components instead of only larger assemblies. For example, if something on a macbook board breaks they have to sell the individual component. Currently Apple/Samsung require you to…

Mind-blowing that you can have a rare nearly-unanimous decision be reached at a time when agreement is hard to come by, and it still won't get through.

That's NY State politics for as old as time.

Cuomo was famous for pulling this kind of shit regularly, like with the bi-partisan passed E-bike law he vetoed, because he had grudges against sponsors of bills or because they didn't come to him personally and "kiss the ring"[1].

Hochul has proved in short time to be every bit as rotten as her predecessor. Just without the grab-ass.

[1]: trade political favors in exchange for him not vetoing your bill.

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#260

Post by nemo44x »

macNchz wrote: post #248
nemo44x wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s such a weird thing to not vote for someone for. I mean, I get it - it’s a principled stance and all. But you should never vote on principal. You should vote to win so that the real issues you care about are reified. Principal could make you feel good but you still lost. Winning is the only thing that matters.

Many people consider not having election deniers in government to be a “real issue” in and of itself. Having people in office who sow discord and continue to promulgate a fantasy about election integrity actively takes focus away from more important things. The winning at-all-costs attitude is what got us here in the first place: people so concerned with winning and having their people in office they don’t care if th…

It’s about outcomes. If that’s an outcome you care greatly about then that’s your decision to make. For me it ranks low on the set of outcomes I desire, especially when compared to the outcomes the opposition desires.

The book “Rules for Radicals” talks about this and it has been a tool of left wing activists for 60+ years. You see it today for instance with various activists groups that plea for “our democracy” on one hand while destroying things and disrupting society until they get their way outside the democratic process.

Post reply on HN