Hacker News Reader

Comment by spollo | Hacker News Reader

Unlike the sealed beam headlamps however, this law isn't requiring any particular technology. It's just outlawing a known harmful one.

In some ways this is nicer because a company doesn't need to do specific emission and noise testing certifications to comply with a single municipalities regulations. So people in Oakland can have potentially more choices while achieving a reduction of combustion emissions.

View on HN

But it's still subject the same issues for the same reason. I can build a gas powered generator which feeds electricity to my electric blower and poof it's legal now. But in terms of noise/emissions/etc the problem is the same.

So the lesson is that Government really shouldn't get in the game of trying to regulate specific technologies rather than whatever harmful side effects are created by the technology. Regulate noise and emissions, and let the engineers find the best ways of meeting those targets.

No one's going to do that other than maybe an insane hobbyist. It would combine the worst aspects of gas and electric blowers. A law doesn't have to stop every possible bad outcome to be worth having.

Right, like auto makers would never put a phone style interface right into their cars, so that people could avoid "distracted driving" by hooking their phone up to their car and using the car's touch screen legally instead of the phone's. Only insane hobbyists would do that, as it combines the worse aspects of the requiring human touch and distraction to operate with the slow technology release cycle of auto manufacturers.

And once people actually start trying to do, then it would be a great time to address it in a law.

There are practically infinite bad things that someone could possibly do. You can't outlaw them all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com