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

U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

macdailynews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 381 posts

Re: U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

#351

Post by kube-system »

mmh0000 wrote: post #220
kube-system wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vehicle regulation in the US is piss poor. Here's the full list of states that require all passenger vehicles to be inspected for safety and emissions every year: * New York * Massachussets * Vermont

Utah used to require safety inspections every year, but they eliminated them; there were no noticeable side effects [1]. "Safety Inspections" were generally just a grift for third-party repairshops to collect free money and I couldn't be happier that they are no longer a thing. Be aware that "safety" and "emissions" are different. Emissions testing is still required biannually for newish vehicles and yearly for older…

That’s a really shallow interpretation of the data.

1. The safety inspections were never rigorous to begin with. Everyone who drives a piece of shit car in a state with safety inspections “knows a guy”. And in many urban areas, you can just drive around without an inspection.

2. Police very rarely sit at the roadside doing root cause analysis after an accident. If somebody loses control of their vehicle, they write a report for insurance or at most write them a ticket for failure to maintain control. So of course you don’t see a measurable increase in accidents due to faulty equipment. It’s because they rarely look for faulty equipment after an accident. So they aren’t measuring it.

Re: U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

#352

Post by FireBeyond »

cyberge99 wrote: post #66
cogman10 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm in Idaho, so not such resource exists. It would have to be a federal agency that does the enforcement because our cops/prosecutors/lawmakers won't ever make something like that happen.

You can take temporary comfort knowing that it’s costing them $7 per gallon for that little asshole stunt. It seems you have to he is especially insecure to intentionally want to burn smoke on someone else. Especially when Tesla’s have a BioWeapon air filtration setting.

> Especially when Tesla’s have a BioWeapon air filtration setting.

I'm sure it's just as capable as the bulletproof glass.

Re: U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

#353

Post by kube-system »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #286
Retric wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For emissions there is often nothing visually wrong with the car. So you’d essentially be giving up on enforcement if you didn’t require everyone to get their car checked at least every few years. Doing it every year is IMO overkill. As to safety inspections it’s not a very large effect, but they do save lives and the expense is generally rather small. Yes it impacts the poor more, but that’s because getting unsafe v…

> So you’d essentially be giving up on enforcement Yes, that is precisely what I was suggesting. At least in the general case. Spot enforcement of notable cases when witnessed (such as the aforementioned coal rolling) seems like a good idea to me. It comes down to the cost benefit tradeoff. Most cars will be used as sold, will be kept in good repair, and will eventually be scrapped due to a failure unrelated to the e…

Police generally don’t issue fix it citations in the US in anywhere except for the most affluent neighborhoods where it’s unusual to see vehicles in poor condition.

You can go to any poor neighborhood in the US and find visible safety issues with vehicles in a matter of minutes. Police in poor neighborhoods have more pressing issues to be dealing with.

Regardless, the police aren’t equipped to be dealing with vehicle safety or emissions issues anyway. They can’t tell whether a vehicle driving down the street has blown shocks, faulty brakes, or ball joints that are ready to pop off the vehicle. Most of these issues aren’t visible unless you have the car up on a lift. As long as your exhaust is quiet and your lights generally work, you’re unlikely to be cited by police anywhere in the US.

People with faulty equipment are crashing every day in the US and it’s never recorded that it’s the cause. In the vast majority of cases, there’s no way anyone would ever know.

Re: U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

#354

Post by llm_nerd »

curt15 wrote: post #201
stavros wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wtf people are doing this on purpose? What's wrong with people?

Chest-thumping

Can you provide a citation on this? Sounds like worthless conjecture.

Please provide a arXiv claim to back up your post or delete it from HN.

Re: U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

#355

Post by hedora »

triceratops wrote: post #238
hedora wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're describing Corporatist Libertarians. Traditional Libertarians: No organization (government or otherwise) should be large enough or powerful enough to infringe on anyone's liberties. Corporatist Libertarians: No government should be powerful enough to infringe on the liberties of corporations. Corporatism has taken over about 50% of the Democrat, Republican and Libertarian parties. They're what people usually m…

> Traditional Libertarians: No organization (government or otherwise) should be large enough or powerful enough to infringe on anyone's liberties. But how?

One easy way: Limit the size of organizations + governments, and ban border control. Don't like San Francisco? Move to LA or Sac, and you get a completely different government.

Don't like Meta or Fox News? No worries, they would have been broken up at 1% their current size.

Re: U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

#356

Post by kortilla »

marysol5 wrote: post #306
kortilla wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I sprayed some cancerous chemical in someone's face, I'd be arrested within the hour. I'd be on the regional news, even. No you wouldn’t. You’ve just described 2nd hand smoke which you can easily get hit with walking down any sidewalk in the US.

Doing an intentional act, vs a passive outcome is two differing things

Blowing smoke in someone’s face can be very intentional and nobody would ever make news or be arrested for doing it to some passerby

Re: U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

#357

Post by kortilla »

marysol5 wrote: post #302
kortilla wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn’t say it’s piss poor in the entire US just because it is draconian in those 3 states.

"draconian" Jesus christ

yep, you might want to consider why those states are a minority. Reacting with incredulity to try to convince people a minority view is better is not good for whatever it is you’re trying to sell.

Re: U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

#358

Post by kube-system »

kortilla wrote: post #357
marysol5 wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"draconian" Jesus christ

yep, you might want to consider why those states are a minority. Reacting with incredulity to try to convince people a minority view is better is not good for whatever it is you’re trying to sell.

They're a minority because the prevailing attitude in the US is that the only way to solve transportation for the poor is to enable them to drive broken cars around.

Re: U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

#359

Post by vel0city »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #250
fc417fc802 wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should that be required? Let people do as they will and impose penalties for problematic behavior (including negligence). I lived in a state with safety inspections and AFAICT it was little more than yet another disproportionate speed bump for the poor and a complete waste of time for society at large. I do see the merit of inspecting larger trailers (such as for boats) once a year given the combined increased li…

I live in a country with mandatory (mostly-)yearly car inspections (and all other motor vehicles). Many time you don't even know that there's an issue and they only find it during the inspection. Handbrake works only on one side, normal brakes don't work properly on one of the wheels, there's play in one of the joints or tie rods, etc. You park, pull the handbrake, you have no idea that if you parked on an incline, y…

> Handbrake works only on one side, normal brakes don't work properly on one of the wheels, there's play in one of the joints or tie rods, etc.

Do any of these states even actually check for these things? Texas used to have required safety and emissions requirements. It was largely tires aren't completely shot and seem somewhat straight (alignment was definitely not a requirement though), essential lighting is functional (headlights, taillights, turn signals if originally equipped), wipers are OK. Emissions was a check of the gas cap and an OBD-II scan. For motorcycles there was a braking test but I never saw a similar test done on a car.

That said I think it shouldn't have gone away. Personally I think if you're going to operate such a dangerous thing in public it should have a lot of scrutiny. I've seen too many cars experience some kind of crazy failure from poor maintenance end up hurting others on the highways around me. Having a desk job at a window facing two major highways for a long time, you see so much injury and death, so much of it avoidable.

Re: U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100k users of car-tinkering app

#360

Post by vel0city »

temp8830 wrote: post #327
Retric wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm entirely unconvinced that regular testing leads to an overall improvement large enough to matter assuming sufficient requirements were imposed on the vehicle at the time of manufacture. Only ~95% of cars pass emissions tests last year (it varies by state). As each car is tested several times over its lifespan you’ll find the majority of IC cars eventually need something fixed to reduce smog. This isn’t some wil…

But that's 95% of cars that didn't need to be tested. All that the testing requirement does is reinforce the (correct) public's perception that it's a free money scheme. If the "check engine" light is not on in a modern car it's pretty much good to go. When cars do need an emissions related fix, it's almost always that little charcoal canister that people flood with gas because nobody told them why it's a bad idea to…

I've had a few cars fail emissions over the years and it was never because of the vapor. It was normally P0420 codes that weren't resolved from O2 sensors and other attempted fixes on 20 year old Hondas. Or fouled EGR airflow spaces needing cleaning. Or EGR/manifold baffles that would get stuck.
Post reply on HN