Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | robhlt's commentslogin

The Dangerous Vehicle Abatement Program was meant to deal with drivers like this, but it was allowed to expire in 2023 after the NYC DOT failed to actually implement it.

The program allowed the DOT to make drivers with more than 15 speed camera or 5 red light camera tickets in a year to take a safe driving course or have their car siezed. The DOT only took action against a small fraction of eligible offenders however.

More: https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2023/09/22/analysis-dangerous-ve...


The timer on copyright starts once a work is published, not when the work is first started. So works that spend a decade or more in development would be unaffected by this.


Depends on what you mean by "published." If I'm shopping a script around, it's copyrighted when I'm done writing it. People may start seeing it right way, but it could take years to find a home and then get made.


What leads you to believe $12B includes normal things that would be spent regardless? The source of that quote makes no such claim. They have every incentive to quote as low a price as they can reasonably defend, and it would be very easy to defend a quote that only includes new and additional expenses that are directly attributed to the war.


The $12B figure[1] is almost exclusively munitions used so far. The US didn't buy munitions and use them, they already had them.

The cost reports (updated as the conflict goes on) will also include payroll, fuel, food, supplies, etc. Everything needed to conduct the war - but much of that is already spent even if not at war.

[1] - https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kevin-hassett-national-economic...


I don't think we even need to go that far. Just remove protection for paid advertisements. It's absurd that Meta cannot be held liable for the ads they promote when a newspaper can be held liable if they were to publish the same ad.


But isn't this difficult when the tech bosses are in cahoots with the country bosses? And honestly even if the leadership changes, I somehow have a feeling the techs will naturally switch boats as well - might be a reason why the opposition doesn't paint them that much nowadays, to make sure they switch along.


They were all staunch Democrats with pro-censor stances until 14 months ago, and for a long long time.


How does that test suite get built and validated? A comprehensive and high quality test suite is usually much larger than the codebase it tests. For example, the sqlite test suite is 590x [1] the size of the library itself

1. https://sqlite.org/testing.html


By sweat and tears, and unfortunately, AI can only help so much in those cases. You'll have to have a really concrete idea about what your product is and how it should work.


sqlite is an extreme outlier not a typical example, with regard to test suite size and coverage.


More like signaling that a specific human wrote it themselves instead of one of their human assistants. The article is mostly about emails from the Epstein files so non-human authorship wasn't really a possibility at the time they were written.


The legal standard that must be met for this kind of discrimination is called "Bona fide occupational qualification" [1]

Generally customer demand is not enough use this defense. Airlines tried using it to defend hiring only female flight attendants and lost.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bona_fide_occupational_qualifi...


Interesting, the Wikipedia article has this to say

Mere customer satisfaction, or lack thereof, is not enough to justify a BFOQ defense, as noted in the cases Diaz v. Pan Am. World Airways, Inc. and Wilson v. Southwest Airlines Co. Therefore, customer preference for females does not make femininity a BFOQ for the occupation of flight attendant. However, there may be cases in which customer preference is a BFOQ – for example, femininity is reasonably necessary for Playboy Bunnies. Several breastaurants like Hooters have also used such requirements of femininity and female sex appeal under a BFOQ defense. Customer preference can "'be taken into account only when it is based on the company's inability to perform the primary function or service it offers,' that is, where sex or sex appeal is itself the dominant service provided."

So basically the question to ask it "Is it a bona fide occupational qualification that the driver be female?" Seems like a high standard to reach. Arguments based on "feels" as in "I don't feel safe around this kind of person/employee" seem like the very kind of discrimination that the law has tried hard to eliminate. It's pre-judging someone based on sex, and deciding that they aren't safe even though they haven't done anything. I understand that women are often harassed, but the law already has a process for dealing with harassment.

I predict this kind of thing (apps that allow customers to discriminate on the basis of protected class) will spread and eventually be challenged in court. Curious how this will all play out and become settled law.


> I understand that women are often harassed, but the law already has a process for dealing with harassment.

And that would be a good argument if we could see that the process really is used and trusted. Do we? What I see is the opposite; the ubers and bolts of this world only care as much they have to. So what is probably happening is that uber calculates this will be cheaper than dealing with the consequences of women losing trust and stopping using their services. If this is banned by the courts, they will move on to the next cheapest solution and so on.

What would interest me is, what would be a proper solution to this issue? Apart from Waymo, probably a surveillance/recording of all the interactions between the customer and the driver?


All that Corporate IT stuff can work on Linux, we just have to start demanding Linux for them to put in the effort. Macs used to be in the same position, Corporate IT only knew how to manage Windows so that's what everyone got. Eventually the ability to use a Mac became enough of a recruitment draw that they had to make it work. The same thing can happen with Linux.


It technically can but it's a lot more hassle.

As one example, on Linux most developer tools don't obey the system proxy configuration, each tool has its own archaic configuration for that. So we end up with a lengthy list of how to configure each tool for our MITM proxy. Sure, MITM proxies aren't ideal anyway but we're unfortunately stuck with this.

Many security tools have a Linux version but omit the GUI component where users can do stuff like request exceptions. Another big thing for developers because they often need that.

WiFi certificate auto provisioning is missing from the MDM tool we use. So it has to be all scripted. On windows and Mac we just click a box to turn it on. And this works differently on different distros.

So yeah as someone who builds Linux management I can imagine some companies don't bother.


I guess it depends on the kind of "Linux" you want. Corporate IT will probably roll out RHEL or similar to the desktops, take away your root access, and install a virus scanner too.


I worked at a bring your own distro place before, ISO certified. I don’t exactly recall what we had to install for compliance but one of them was Clam AV. So it’s possible.

I recall Arch, Ubuntu, Debian and Fedora being used. Relatively small shop though, like 40 devs.

Ironically we were contracting with ASML at the time and ended up having to work on Windows machines using Remote Desktop 99% of the time.


Ubuntu is way more popular for it.

RHEL is very popular on servers but not on desktops. Which is in part due to Red Hat themselves, they don't really do much to promote it for this usecase. Personally (as an admin) I don't mind because it's such a closed ecosystem anyway. They're always rent seeking which Canonical does a lot less. Canonical is always trying to sell us landscape though, but we never went for it because it doesn't solve any of the issues we have with the existing tooling.


Latest Fedora versions can also be regarded as a more modern, faster moving RHEL. Granted it doesn't come with a support agreement or the ability to get one (I just am guessing) so it may not tick all the checkboxes for corporate use.


Well it's ubuntu that the developers are asking for, and that is much better supported by our corporate tooling.

Personally I wouldn't touch redhat with a 10 foot pole after what they pulled with centos, however if my work did want to I'd make an effort on their behalf. They don't seem to though.


GCC's build process does this. GCC is built 3 separate times, starting with the host compiler, then with the compiler from the previous step. If the output of stage 2 and 3 do not match the build fails.


Waymo can go camera-only in the future too by training a camera-only model alongside their camera+lidar model.

They'll probably get there faster too because the decisions the camera+lidar model makes can be used to automatically evaluate the camera-only model.


Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: