The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
No bio...
User ID: 174
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
57m ago
The inevitable increase of regulation once a regulatory framework is in place is part of it. Another part is that merely having a regulatory framework transforms your industry from "building cool stuff" to "checking regulatory boxes and making sure all the regulation-following is documented". Once the principals know they're going to be put out of business or go to jail for not following the regs or having the docs for following the regs, the whole development process is going to get bureaucratized to produce those docs. This both directly makes development much slower and more tedious, and drives the sort of people who do innovative work out of the field (because they didn't get into the field to sit in meetings where you discuss whether the regulatory requirement referenced in SSDD paragraph 2.0.2.50 is properly related to the SDD paragraph 3.1.2, the ICD paragraph 4.1.2.5, and the STP paragraph 6.6.6, which lines of code implement SDD paragraph 3.1.2, and to make sure the SIP properly specifies the update procedures)
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
1hr ago
I don't know. All I know is the consequences. Once the cars become popular enough, a self-driving car company is basically going to be mostly a legal company, defending (or settling) lawsuits in all 50 states involving its cars. And that's even if its cars are perfect and never cause accidents, especially since the car company is going to look like "deep pockets" to plaintiff's attorneys and juries. The cost of all this legal defense is going to increase the cost of the cars by a ridiculous amount, and the more cars there are the more of a chance of a "reverse lottery" where a self-driving car is involved in an accident that kills a busful of kindergartners and is found liable for more than Alex Jones even was. As long as there's a fairly small number of cars they can play the odds, but a liability regime which involves a car manufacturer in every major accident one of their cars is involved in will kill the whole thing.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
1hr ago
Liability also doesn't come into play until the suit is underway.
The expenses start immediately.
And yes, I predict that if actual self-driving cars become more common, either we will see limits on liability or the companies will be driven out of the market or out of business.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
2hr ago
Unfortunately, if manufacturers of self-driving cars can be sued for all accidents in which self-driving cars are involved (the "caused" part doesn't come into play until the lawsuit is underway), self-driving cars are essentially banned. The cost of covering that liability is staggering.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
4hr ago
So while people might have supported the ADA if it was 1% of the budget, they might start getting pissed at the program when it balloons up to 10% of the budget and a bunch of reverse lottery sob stories start showing up in the news. And suddenly instead of 10% or even 1% of the budget, you get 0% for your cause and no one trusts you with a 1% allotment cuz they will all remember the horror days of 10%.
Except that's not what happens. Your program lasts forever because it sounds good to the normies and has strong built-in constituencies. So there's no incentive NOT to do this; if you do it you win.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
6hr ago
You're trying to use "rational discussion" as a cudgel to get people to accept your conclusion that a regulatory framework is a good idea and the rational thing to do is argue over the details. And you're doing it clumsily.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
7hr ago
Gay marriage was on a slippery slope down to all the trans stuff we have today. I don't know if the slope ends before dog marriage. Not sure what that has to do with a regulatory framework being a slippery slope towards the death of innovation.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
8hr ago
The draft not working very well in Vietnam was why we got rid of it, though.
We got rid of it because we withdrew from Vietnam
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
8hr ago
It won't exempt blacks. It will merely allow hardship exemptions, including exemptions for being a member of a marginalized class and whose ancestors were once held in an enslaved condition within the United States.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
10hr ago
The draft doesn't require social cohesion (as we had in WWII), just government force (as we had during Vietnam)
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
10hr ago
No motte-and-bailey; slippery slope. I'm not going to argue about the specifics about any particular spot on the slippery slope because the main problem is that it is on the slippery slope.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
10hr ago
The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, both state and federally. State courts are certainly allowed to evaluate the constitutionality of state laws.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
10hr ago
Security for devices for the defense industry is one of those reasons, but I think household devices would be mostly outside their purview.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
10hr ago
If the blue tribe needs red tribe warm bodies to fight blue tribe battles, most likely Red will just respond to calls to patriotism. But if they don't, there's always force (the draft).
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
10hr ago
If you're going to just ignore everything I wrote
I'm not ignoring it, I'm rejecting it. I'm saying requirements to fly an aircraft have frozen in place because FAA regs froze them in place.
I'm not going to argue about the specific regulations because that's implicitly accepting that the regulatory framework is a good thing, and I think it's a bad thing.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
11hr ago
If the FAA hadn't foreclosed it all at the start by freezing the technology in place with regulations we might indeed live in a different world already. If the NHTSA existed back when the model T was current, we might need checklists for driving cars and have regulations based on needing to turn a crank to start.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
11hr ago
It's not true at all.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
11hr ago
You have zero reason for anyone to believe that the core reason why we don't have flying cars is regulatory and not technological/cultural/practical, especially when I can see with my own two eyes that every proposal that comes up is obscenely whack from a technological/cultural/practical standpoint.
Of course they're "obscenely whack". The only people foolish enough to propose them are those who know nothing about the industry and thus the fact that the regulatory barriers are insurmountable.
If you want to fly you have to learn a bevy of arcane radio procedures, log every trip you take, follow various checklists every time you fly, get your aircraft maintained only by FAA-certified mechanics, have regular medical examinations, and more. And you still only can fly in good weather, which makes every trip a risk of being stranded. There's no market for a flying car, even if technical barriers were overcome, given those requirements.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
12hr ago
There's no point in talking about the specific merits of the specific regulations, since doing so is like the old joke about the prostitute -- "we've established that, now we're just arguing over the price".
Once you've accepted that the government should be regulating this sort of thing your road to hell is paved and greased. The end state might look like aircraft where nothing actually new can be built because the regulatory barriers are too high, it might look like buildings which all have to be basically the same because the rules constrain the solutions overmuch, it might look like dishwashers and laundry where new things are forced to be less and less effective due to regulators' efficiency obsessions. It won't look like innovation. It's not that any epsilon amount of regulation instantly kills innovation to zero; it's that having the regulatory framework in the first place makes satisfying the regulations Job One, and that job tends to expand until it fills the space. Over time, not instantly. And it tends to drive out the kind of people who would do the innovation, because they hate all the box-checking, on top of hating all the constraints themselves.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
12hr ago
That you can scoff at the idea that regulation can kill innovation doesn't mean it cannot.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
13hr ago
The previous time I heard this sentiment was from conservatives criticizing universities for being too left-leaning/left-biased.
It's pretty common for the leftists to take rightist talking points and throw them back, often in situations where they don't really apply. It's not that surprising they'll also use them against other leftists.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
13hr ago
No one looking at a lot full of cars doesn’t make sure the car has airbags and seatbelts and antilock brakes.
Since they're all mandated now, no one bothers. And when they weren't, people indeed chose cars without them. But those are a different issue; those are safety, and what we're talking about with IoT devices is security. Think door locks and immobilizers, not airbags and seat belts.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
13hr ago
But I’d want a conservative President with the kind of deep congressional connections and sleazy lobbying ability to actually be able to pass things
The option is not on the table. It's Trump or 4 more years of Biden. At this time the implicit message associated all this criticism of Trump for not being successful enough (much of which is true) is that you might as well vote for Biden and wait for the Perfect Conservative to come along; it's not going to happen.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
1d ago
Or do you have some weird twisted argument that literally any epsilon>0 of regulation instantly grinds innovation to a halt?
It never stays epsilon.
Architecture, for instance. Do you know what architects do nowadays? It isn't really to design buildings. It's to figure out a way for any given space to satisfy fire regs and ADA regs at the same time, while still being usable. If there's anything left over for creativity, it's taken by energy efficiency rules.
Aircraft I mentioned in another post. No flying cars, no supersonic jets, and the big aircraft manufacturers aren't even planning new designs, just variants on old ones.
In support of this interpretation:
https://www.themotte.org/post/995/culture-war-roundup-for-the-week/210060?context=8#context (whole thing)
https://www.themotte.org/post/995/culture-war-roundup-for-the-week/209894?context=8#context ("Maybe their little subculture will change.")
https://www.themotte.org/post/995/culture-war-roundup-for-the-week/209881?context=8#context ("coloring inside the lines")
More options
Context Copy link