Earlier quoted context omitted.
safer for whom? Remember cars are not the only ones participating in traffic.
“assuming a controlled access road without pedestrian traffic”
such roads barely need speed limits. In some places they do not have them
Malus – Clean Room as a Service
511–520 of 566 posts
Re: Malus – Clean Room as a Service
#512Earlier quoted context omitted.
We should welcome more precise law enforcement. Imperfect enforcement is too easy for law enforcement officers to turn into selective enforcement. By choosing who to go after, law enforcement gets the unearned power to change the law however they want, enforcing unwritten rules of their choosing. Having law enforcement make the laws is bad. The big caveat, though, is that when enforcement becomes more accurate, the r…
The existing laws are rarely well specified enough for precise enforcement, often on purpose. You cannot have precise enforcement with imprecise laws. It’s as simple as that. The HN favorite in this respect is “fair use” under copyright. It isn’t well specified enough for “precise enforcement”. How do you suggest we approach that one?
We can fix it by fixing the law. In this case the obvious solution is to abolish copyright (and other IP laws).
Re: Malus – Clean Room as a Service
#513Earlier quoted context omitted.
The speed limit example is a great one. Consider a road that has a 35mph limit. Now - which of the following scenarios is SAFER: a) I'm driving on the road in a brand new 4x4 porsche on a sunny day with great visibility and brand new tyres. Doing 40mph. b) I'm driving on the same road in a 70s car with legal but somewhat worn out tyres, in the dark, while it's raining heavily. Doing 35mph. Of course technically optio…
If there was an accident an officer might give you a fine in both cases where I live. In the Porsche case they can say you broke the law and were speeding that led to the accident. But also in the case of old car for failing to adjust your speed to your skills, the state of your vehicle and conditions of the road and weather regardless of the speed limit.
The classic. In Bulgaria they used to do that (and maybe still do). Every time there was an accident they'd often write up everyone for "speed not matching the conditions" with the idea that all accidents are avoidable, you just weren't going fast/slow enough so git gud and don't forget to pay in the next 2 weeks to get a discount.
Re: Malus – Clean Room as a Service
#514Earlier quoted context omitted.
This unwritten distinction exists only to allow targeted enforcement in service of harassment and oppression. There is no upside (even if getting away with speeding feels good). We should strive to enforce all laws 100% of the time as that is the only fair option. If a law being enforced 100% of the time causes problems then rethink the law (i.e. raise the speed limit, or design the road slower).
What about drunk driving laws?
Same argument applies. Driving slowly for 1km 0.01 under the speed limit, over legal blood alco limit is safer than driving at the speed limit for 10kms just under the alco limit.
It's very easy to come up with thought experiments to show that technically illegal scenarios are not necessarily more dangerous than some legal scenarios.
The law is often made to be easy to apply, not for precision. Hard to see how anyone could see otherwise.
That's not say that the laws are necessarily problematic. You have to draw the line somewhere.
Re: Malus – Clean Room as a Service
#515An interesting aspect of this, especially their blog post ( https://malus.sh/blog.html ), is that it acknowledges a strain in our legal system I've been observing for decades, but don't think the legal system or people in general have dealt with, which is that generally costs matter . A favorite example of mine is speed limits. There is a difference between "putting up a sign that says 55 mph and walking away", "putt…
My mom, who's a lawyer, always told us that laws don't matter, what matter is how hard they're enforced, and we can simply ignore laws that exist but we know for a fact they're not enforced (or not enforceable). I once had small talk with Lawrence Lessig after a conference of his, and when I told him that he was visibly shocked, as if I had told him I was raised to be a criminal. Now I'm not sure what to think anymor…
Your mother's advice sounds terribly selfish, honestly. Our society is pretty much build on the fact that most people are in some way "good" and will not break laws and rules even if they could get away with it.
There are tons of stuff every day I could steal, knowing that any law I might break would not be enforceable simply because no one knew it was me. Littering in the forest. Dumping toxic materials into rivers.
All that works because most people don't do it, only a few.
Re: Malus – Clean Room as a Service
#516Earlier quoted context omitted.
And this goes both ways. Many governments around the world have entities to which you can write a letter, and those entities are frequently obligated to respond to that letter within a specific time frame. Those laws have been written with the understanding that most people don't know how to write letters, and those who do, will not write them unless absolutely necessary. This allows the regulators to be slow and ope…
I have some lawyer friends, who work as internal council to companies, that are already experiencing this. People are cranking out legal requests and claims with LLMs and sending them to companies. Almost all of them are pretty much meaningless, and should be ignored. However, they legally can't just ignore them. They have to have someone review the claim, verify that it is bullshit, and then they can ignore it. That…
They just need to implement a better LLM that is able to deal with all that crap.
At the end we will just have agents interacting with each other.
Re: Malus – Clean Room as a Service
#517Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is that "all sides" agree that if the constitution was written today, surprise, surprise, it'd totally agree with them; the gun control people are sure that the 2nd wouldn't cover military weapons, the gun lovers are sure that it would mandate tanks for everyone. But since having 300 million people have a detailed, nuanced discussion about anything is impossible, everyone works at the edges.
I think their point was that a lot (but not all) of the existing argument boils down to “Well it should be that way because someone decided it hundreds of years ago” so if we are consciously starting again from scratch, ideally that specific argument no longer holds water. (I’d say we should instead use data based approaches, look at what has been successful in other countries, etc, although that’s slightly expanding…
One big difference between the UK's historic constitutionalia and the US is that the UK generally recognises that we only do things a certain way because agreeing how to change them is too hard, while the US appears to think that they do things in their certain way because that's the right way to do them.
Specific examples for the UK: inducting politicians into the Privy Council in order to qualify them for security briefings, Henry VII powers, and ministers' authority deriving from the seal they're given by the sovereign. Which would almost make as much sense if it were a marine mammal as it does being a stamp.
The thing being, they work well enough. And if you want to replace them, you need to work out what to replace them with and how.
Re: Malus – Clean Room as a Service
#518I feel like this is related to these issues (with somebody attempting this approach for real): https://github.com/chardet/chardet/issues/327 https://github.com/chardet/chardet/issues/331
Wow. The guy who’s been thanklessly maintaining the project for 10+ years, with very little help, went way out of his way to produce a zero-reuse, ground-up reimplementation so that it could be MIT licensed... and the very-online copyleft crowd is crucifying him for it and telling him to kick rocks. Unbelievable. This is why we can’t have nice things.
Mark Pilgrim isn't even the original author, he just ported the C version to Python and contributed nothing to it for the last 10 years.
If you take 5 minutes to look at the code you'll see that v7 works in a completely different way, it mostly uses machine learning models instead of heuristics. Even if you compare the UTF8 or UTF16 detection code you'll see that they have absolutely nothing in common.
Its just API compatible and the API is basically 3 functions.
If he had published this under a different name nobody would have challenged it.
Re: Malus – Clean Room as a Service
#519Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If speed limits were automated rigidly enforced 100% of the time, it would be impossible to drive. If you find it impossible to follow a simple speed limit, then getting you off the road is the ideal outcome.
Please shred your drivers license immediately, if you at any point in your life have exceeded the speed limit by any amount, or otherwise violated the traffic regulations in any way whatsoever.
That is completely different argument. Yes, I exceeded speed limit here and there. I am not deluded enough to think it was "unavoidable" or "impossible to drive slower".
It is perfectly possible to drive and obey all speed limits. It is even technically easy. Us people choosing not to do so, because we are impatient, feeling competitive against other drivers or because we just think we can get away with it now does not make it impossible.
Re: Malus – Clean Room as a Service
#520Earlier quoted context omitted.
>driving enough below the limit that they won't accidentally exceed it That is precisely why traffic would effectively grind to a halt. Because going even 0,0001 over the limit is so easy, you would have to turtle through traffic to get anywhere while making certain you never go above the limit. 50km zone is now 30km, and you didn't decelerate quickly enough and were going 32km at the threshold. 60km zone, but you ac…
Everybody going 30km/h does not constitute “halt”
In a literal sense, no. In a practical sense, yes.