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

291–300 of 342 posts

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#291

Post by Jon_Lowtek »

Animats wrote: post #283
Jon_Lowtek wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The current debate is about an agreement mentioned in memorandum 93 ( https://twitter.com/JonCampbellNY/status/1608327624526548993 ), which describes changes that were not part of the amendment in May 2022. I also thought it may just be a bad summary of those changes, but it details changes that were not done in may. So it is either a very badly written memo, or there is something more going on than can not currently…

The bad stuff went in back in February, 2022, and was adopted in May 2022. Compare the "Limitations" section of S4104 and S4104A. That's what guts the bill. Here's the "sponsor memo" on the amendment: DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ORIGINAL AND AMENDED VERSION: This version makes technical clarifications to the bill, including providing that the requirements will apply to products with a value over ten dollars, adjusted annually…

the "bad stuff" currently discussed is about manufacturers only making assemblies available, not components. (that is the big topic in the linked video) I diffed S4104 and S4104A and don't see that in the changes. I also don't see the interpretation of Louis Rossmann in the old version, the definition of "part" was always quite open to interpretation and neither "component" nor "assembly" are mentioned in S4104A. But the relevant point here is: the governors memo explicitly states that the manufacturer only needs to provide assemblies, not components, if there is a risk of injury. The only change from S4104 to S4104A using the word "injury" is the new section 5 about liability. The change mentioned in the governors memo is not in the amended bill that passed Senate and Assembly in May/June 2022.

The governors memo also talks about eliminating the requirement related to overriding security features, which is section 2.B of the bill. Again the change the governors memo describes is not in the amendment made earlier this year.

The governors memo also talks about business to business and business to government sales. There is a point 3.E related to emergency communication equipment, but it would be a stretch to match those. Again the change the governors memo mentions as being agreed upon is not there.

I would be happy if the governors approval memo is horseshit and talks nonsense. Because the alternative is that they are making backroom deals changing the bills text between senate vote and signing.

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#292

Post by blamazon »

thetopher wrote: post #215

I just can’t watch Rossmann’s videos anymore. He’s a smart guy with important things to say, but it’s hard to take him seriously. His videos are 90% hyperbole, cynicism, and snide remarks. It’s too much to put up with to figure out what he’s really trying to say. I have to wonder if this style appeals to his audience, or if he’d be more effective without it.

This happens with a lot of full time YouTubers. They optimize the facets of their performance that boost the metrics with the mainstream and it often alienates the core audience that got them off the ground.

I'm not surprised Louis has gone all in on emotional anti-authoritarian rants, it must play well with 'the algorithm', versus laptop repair.

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#293

Post by sitkack »

silisili wrote: post #105

This is really sad. I used to watch Louis when he was coming up. I didn't even own an Apple device, I just liked how he'd treat customers and show all of us his approach, and how to do it, for free. The corrupt government ruined him. It turned a beautiful young mind ready to change the world into a really bitter person. That's not a knock against him, but against the NYS Government. Glad he moved away, and hope he ha…

Louis isn't bitter. Outraged, concerned, but not bitter. There are so many dimensions and textures to "upset", I feel like folks have lost their ability to discern all the different types.

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#294

Post by smcin »

remote_phone wrote: post #138
subradios wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Be a good person" is not a law I want anyone writing, because such a policy relies on the moral fortitude of random executive bureaucrats. "Wrong" reason is subjective. Tickets are nonrefundable because otherwise the network doesn't work, financially. Every hole in that increases costs far beyond the refunds themselves further down the line. Air travel is not a high margin, luxury product, it's a lot margin mass mar…

> Tickets are nonrefundable because otherwise the network doesn't work, financially. This is 100% false. Southwest Airlines is one of the most profitable airlines in the US and their refund policy for refundable flights is a full refund up to 10 mins before the flight. For nonrefundable flights you get full credit if you cancel up to 10 mins before your flight, with no additional fees. During the pandemic, ALL airlin…

No it's not 100% false, it's about 70% correct, refunds are in (expiring, non-transferable) flight credits not money-back. The preceding poster said "your money back" not "flight credits".

Flight credits expire (with US carriers, typically in 12 months, sometimes within only 3 months (Spirit), with European carriers, sometimes up to 3 years), and cannot be transferred to any other passenger [0], unlike even airmiles; and using them with partner airlines can be restricted; many passengers are unaware of much of that and airlines do not point it out, and rely on the fact that passengers may not realize till the credit has expired.

(In 7/2022, Southwest did uniquely eliminate expiration on flight credits unexpired from July 28, 2022 onward.)

Just because an airline only initially offers (restricted, expiring) travel credits, doesn't mean much; in some cases [1] passengers may be entitled to an actual money-back refund: (a) canceled flight b) passenger has documented medical circumstance c) cancellations due to Covid d) possibly other circumstance). One excellent advocacy resource is [2] Elliott.org 12/2022: "The complete guide to using your airline flight credit now". EU regulations are more pro-passenger than USDOT.

Southwest in 3/2022 unveiled its long-awaited new fare category "Wanna Get Away Plus" whose key perk is the ability to transfer flight credits, which Southwest calls travel funds (which sounds like intentionally misleading language, but anyway). But again, SW charge more for WGA+.

> Southwest Airlines... refund policy for refundable flights is a full refund up to 10 mins before the flight.

But that's the minority case: only Southwest's Anytime and higher fares are (money-back-)refundable, and they are typically way more expensive (2.5-4x) than non-refundable WGA fares. I can't find data but AFAIK most SW non-business passengers are WGA fares.

So the statement:

>> Tickets are nonrefundable because otherwise the network doesn't work, financially.

is in the general case true.

(One well-known travel hack with SWA for frequent travelers who didn't know their departure dates 3 weeks in advance used to be to buy 3+ different non-refundable tickets spaced out by say a week each, then refund whichever tickets you didn't end up needing. This was still cheaper than one Anytime fare.)

[0]: https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/airline-news/2022/03/2...

[1]: https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/advice/2020/10/09/flig...

[2]: https://www.elliott.org/ultimate-consumer-guides-smart-trave...

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#295

Post by phpisthebest »

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.

Under what basis do you have to claim those "random" inspections "work very well"

Personally I believe they do almost nothing. Food born illness is pretty common and almost impossible to trace unless it is a wide spread outbreak.

Many cities only inspect a food establishment every 2-3 years and in some cases as long as 5 years.

I think reputation, and economics play a larger factor in safety then government inspections. Dirty places making their customers ill tend to close long before the government inspectors come around.

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#296

Post by Waterluvian »

phpisthebest wrote: post #295
Waterluvian wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Under what basis do you have to claim those "random" inspections "work very well" Personally I believe they do almost nothing. Food born illness is pretty common and almost impossible to trace unless it is a wide spread outbreak. Many cities only inspect a food establishment every 2-3 years and in some cases as long as 5 years. I think reputation, and economics play a larger factor in safety then government inspectio…

What country are you referring to?

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#297

Post by smcin »

scarface74 wrote: post #178
free652 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is a lot more, I usually see >100. But even for a cheap flight that was 138 jet blue basic, it's 60 for the middle tier and 110 extra for the refundable.

The middle tier is the real price in my opinion. The only reason the basic tier is there is as upsell opportunity and meant to be punishing. I read somewhere that only 5% of seats sold on Delta are basic. I get it. It’s meant for people who are price sensitive. But aren’t those the ones who can least afford to lose money if something happens?

Exactly. Basic Economy fares were created by airlines to artificially prevent them losing rankings against competitors (esp. LCCs) in the results box for OTEs like Google Flights, Kayak/Booking Holdings, Skyscanner/Trip.com.

I've had a customer rep openly admit to me that they don't expect that anyone should ever actually fly this fare, and strongly discourage them for "satisfaction reasons".

Yet another weaselly practice I found out the hard way recently was that some airlines rules (e.g. JetBlue) intentionally restrict it so that if one leg on a return ticket is Basic Economy, the other one must be too (even if it's priced $$ higher than plain Economy, as was in my case. It tooks me 2hrs of searches mysteriously failing when I tried to checkout ("Rule XXX does not allow this itinerary" and then it invalidates your entire flight search incl. seat assignments). Like the booking process couldn't simply tell you upfront. I called the support number and offered to show them a screenshot of the price difference and they didn't care. It was intentionally impossible to find the cheapest roundtrip price for my itinerary on their own website for any economy search, because their internal search engine typically shows the "cheapest economy fare" which will invariably tend to be basic economy for one segment; and of course this result is garbage if you have bags, which their engine doesn't even allow you specify. So you use a third-party OTE search engine.)

It's amazing the number of opaque anti-consumer practices the US airline industry gets away with.

The only legit use-case for a Basic Economy fare is a price-sensitive last-minute passenger who's 100% sure of their travel date(s)/one-way and has no luggage, or is willing to do without. Essentially what standby (or compassionate fares) used to be back in the 1990s, before the industry quietly killed those off.

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#298

Post by codekansas »

katbyte wrote: post #127
codekansas wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I understand what the alternative is - should you pretend that corporations are not ruthless profit maximizers, and allow them to have undue sway over our legislative system all the same? It seems like the root of the problem is that we've let the institutions which are supposed to hold our politicians to account when they exhibit blatant corruption fall into disrepair.

Do not allow corporations to lobby and influence the law. Do no allow politicians to profit from changes to the law (ie playing the stock markets) Companies are not people and do not have rights.

I mean, doesn't that necessarily follow from an implicit understanding that corporations are ruthless profit maximizers though? I fail to see the supposed ideological inconsistency...

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#299

Post by Animats »

Jon_Lowtek wrote: post #291
Animats wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bad stuff went in back in February, 2022, and was adopted in May 2022. Compare the "Limitations" section of S4104 and S4104A. That's what guts the bill. Here's the "sponsor memo" on the amendment: DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ORIGINAL AND AMENDED VERSION: This version makes technical clarifications to the bill, including providing that the requirements will apply to products with a value over ten dollars, adjusted annually…

the "bad stuff" currently discussed is about manufacturers only making assemblies available, not components. (that is the big topic in the linked video) I diffed S4104 and S4104A and don't see that in the changes. I also don't see the interpretation of Louis Rossmann in the old version, the definition of "part" was always quite open to interpretation and neither "component" nor "assembly" are mentioned in S4104A. But…

Right. We need to wait until the NY site updates and shows the final version of the bill as "signed by governor". Probably Tuesday.

Re: NY Sabotages Right to Repair Bill [video]

#300

Post by codekansas »

college_physics wrote: post #134
codekansas wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I understand what the alternative is - should you pretend that corporations are not ruthless profit maximizers, and allow them to have undue sway over our legislative system all the same? It seems like the root of the problem is that we've let the institutions which are supposed to hold our politicians to account when they exhibit blatant corruption fall into disrepair.

there are plenty of remedies. the interface of private (narrow) and public (broad) interest is vital and unavoidable but it should be subject to outmost transparency and independent checks. further, corporate structures (size, contracts etc) can change themselves (they are just legal constructs after all) to reduce perverse incentives.

Isn't the first part just rephrasing what I said?
Post reply on HN