Hacker News Reader

Comment by tocs3 | Hacker News Reader

I like the modern world and its safety features. Things (cars, planes, food, etc.) are generally safer but I just do not really trust any of the people that would be writing these rules. I fear the regulatory capture aspect of it and what it might mean to me trying to get to the grocery store. I only drive a three or four times a week (most of that is short duration rural driving).

It is not that I think some one will take my car from me so much as the industry may just work to make everything not new obsolete. A new $30K car (or even $8$15K used) is a steep price for an individual to pay to meet regulations.

View on HN

It's worth noting that this is 100% about providing more information to vehicles rather than requiring vehicles to use the feature.

Think of it in the same category as driver assistance technologies (like radar cruise control, forward collision warning, lane assist, rear cross warnings, rear cameras, or blind spot warnings/cameras).

It'll almost certainly never be mandatory to be road legal but it'll probably be a standard feature on most new vehicles.

> It's worth noting that this is 100% about providing more information to vehicles rather than requiring vehicles to use the feature.

I'm calling it here and now: this absolutely will become mandatory in the nearish future. 100%.

Same as in Europe with the speed regulator thingy in the cars... advisory at first now mandatory in many places.

* For some definition of near and mandatory

Even when they started mandating airbags in new vehicles, it took something like seven years to go into effect so car manufacturers had time to plan. And then they didn’t make cars that didn’t have airbags illegal.

Even the most universally embraced ideas take time to roll out.

I agree: it won't happen overnight.

It will happen within a handful of years though. Too much potential for control to let it pass...

Airbags aren’t a useful tool for data/control.

We have to get the `internet` or some other network rolled out first.

Rear cameras are required now, or will be in a few years. Dunno if this is a California thing or national, but just like the third brake light, this is already happening.

California is also working on legislation to require cars to be aware of where they are so they can notify the driver if they’re speeding.

> It'll almost certainly never be mandatory to be road legal but it'll probably be a standard feature on most new vehicles.

I think many of us said the same thing about backup cameras, but since 2018 you can't buy a car in the USA without one. So you have to get a screen in your car whether you want it or not.

I think they meant legal to drive, not just required for new cars

We already have safety rules, but those are ignored!

If you cycle into grocery store, you may get chased and attacked by dangerous dogs. Many people gave up cycling and jogging for that! And in grocery store more dogs and excrements! There are rules against all of that, yet it is widely ignored.

Lidars will get vandalized pretty fast, because they will impede flow of traffic. Or thugs will use it to stop passing vehicles to make kidnapping easy!

> thugs will use it to stop passing vehicles to make kidnapping easy!

We already have this thing, it’s called a red light.

Is there a name for this, when people come up with a plausible sounding scenario for crime driven disaster, but it does not actually have basis in real world? The ‘razor blades in candy’ scares parents every Halloween but is completely made up and has never been reported.

Peter Thiel had a similar moment on Joe Rogan podcast where he explained his elaborate social theory based on how chimps behave, but got the basics of chimp behaviour totally wrong

TL DR: tech people suck at predicting human behaviour

People do get kidnapped at traffic lights. Here's an incident of it happening in Florida a few months ago.

The ability to arbitrarily stop vehicles would be very useful for this kind of crime because it could be done in less crowded areas. And criminals could more readily select for expensive vehicles, young women or whatever else they're wanting.

[1] https://www.crimeonline.com/2024/04/12/video-florida-woman-a... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usuo0jOcHJA

But the comparison we are making is different - do people create a fake traffic light, because that is really easy; and I have never heard of it happening.

Ofcourse there are places where vehicles have to stop naturally, you can’t avoid that.

A convincing set of fake traffic lights requires a meaningful amount of time and equipment, as well as a plausible set of crossroads or roadworks.

To steel man your position though, a fake police costume would probably be just as effective at stopping vehicles arbitrarily. And despite being cheap it's a relatively rare occurrence.

I'd imagine that a fake police uniform is a bit harder to explain than an encrypted laptop and a SDR dongle?

In the US it is a crime to impersonate police that most police zealously prosecute

Construction cones and stop signs are easy to move. *hint hint*

> Is there a name for this, when people come up with a plausible sounding scenario for crime driven disaster, but it does not actually have basis in real world?

It reminds me of Scott Alexander's "The Buying Things from a Store FAQ": https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/the-buying-things-from-a-st...

Also I agree with ChatGPT that it's midway between these two things:

> Urban legend: This is a widely circulated but false story or belief that often serves as a cautionary tale. The "razor blades in candy" story is a classic example, as it's a narrative that spreads fear but lacks evidence.

> Moral panic: This term refers to a situation where public fears and anxieties about a perceived threat (often related to crime or social issues) are exaggerated by the media or other influential sources, even though the threat may be minimal or non-existent. This can lead to widespread but unfounded concerns, like the Halloween candy scare.

> Is there a name for this, when people come up with a plausible sounding scenario for crime driven disaster, but it does not actually have basis in real world?

Movie plot threats:

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/09/movie-plot_th...

Hey it’s you again! You were making a very similar point in a thread about cell phone bans in schools the other day.

Dogs are a major problem in cities as people choose them over children

Reply on news.ycombinator.com