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

> Isn't this true for every safety measure?

Every safety measure faces a question of whether the resources allocated to it are an efficient means of achieving that reduction in risk.

To GP's point, we probably can't prevent people from crashing altogether, but we currently have a road system designed to sacrifice safety on the altar of throughput [0]. How many more or fewer kids (or just people) would die if governments allocated the resources to making roads safer that they currently mandate their citizens use on car seats?

> I don't need a guard on my table saw if I don't stick my thumb in it. Don't need a helmet if I don't fall off of my bike.

Do you think the guard on your table saw makes you safer than training and experience using the saw safely? There are always limited resources and multiple routes to safety, so we shouldn't assume any given safety measure is the best use of those resources (especially in consideration of second-order effects).

[0] https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018-3-1-whats-a-stroad-...


Thanks to risk compensation, making things "safer" doesn't necessarily improve safety. What are the odds that people drive their kids around more (increasing their risk) because having kids in car-seats reduces the perceived risk? How many of those people do you think can point at what the reduction in risk due to car seat use is [0], such that they compensate that risk "rationally"?

[0] Hint: As our sibling conversation shows, that's a non-trivial question.


Putting aside that judges can make exceptions when circumstances warrant, one would think that this function (providing live captioning of the proceedings) would be a reasonable accommodation that courts should be able to provide. Especially now that every courtroom is (or can be) equipped for sound and video to support remote operation, it shouldn't be too difficult to support a display with the captioning via the court IT system and alleviate any concerns about surreptitious recording.

There's already a stenographer recording the proceeding, right? I'd think you could project what they're recording onto a display somewhere.

You'd have to translate what the stenographer wrote, whichever system they used, into plaintext first. A layperson won't be able to understand that.

I'd imagine already if not soon we'll have small speech-to-text models that can run in realtime.


As far as I can tell, Valve makes significant contributions back to Wine via Proton development. Isn't that essentially them supporting their upstream dependencies with their own profits, by using some of those profits to pay people to contribute work to their open source dependencies?

Valve pays over a hundred open source developers to work on the various open source projects that they rely on so heavily, so yeah Valve's 30% of your Steam purchases is already contributing to these open-source projects (like Mesa, the Linux kernel, Wayland, etc.)

https://www.pcgamer.com/valve-is-paying-a-whole-lot-of-devel...



Don't forget:

- the enemy had plenty of material, technical and financial support from adversarial superpowers who were all too happy to see American lives, money and military resources wasted.

That external support is not fully scaled up yet (despite clear reports of Russian intelligence support for Iran), but you can bet it would be in the event of a major ground assault, occupation, and/or counter-insurgency quagmire.


> the enemy had plenty of material, technical and financial support from adversarial superpower

Vietcong weren't exactly fighting with 'plenty of material'. They used weapons from second world war, sometimes first world war, cheap Chinese crap..

Are you comparing that to Americans aircraft, bombs, helicopters ? It was as asymmetrical as it would be against Iran.


People complain about police unions all the time, it's just their complainants don't overlap much with the people who complain about private sector unions.

Note that in this case, you are getting what you pay for: I had a FIIO DAC that sounded amazing but was really bad about full-scale turn-on, sync and desync pops to the extent that it damaged my speakers. Yes, perfect power sequence hygiene would have prevented the problem, but one can't always be ready with the amplifier volume knob when their playback system crashes.

ah good to know. Outside of having a very basic dac for my cans on my desktop, I wouldn't think of any serious equipment failures could happen. Probably wrong to assume that these things are engineered to be safe/redundant.

This is going to be my first DAP in like 15 years, zune being the last one I had. Pretty excited to rock it out for a bit.

There's a current fad out there to move to more single-service type of devices rather than using a phone for everything. Want to try it out myself to be more intentional with my digital actions and ween myself away from corporate social media.


Easy for that to be true: just set your expectations to zero.

The Libertarian Party is solely focused on reducing the liabilities side of the balance sheet in the interest of reducing the income side by lowering taxes. Try showing up to to a libertarian convention with "give me some money to invest in a program that will benefit our whole society" and see how far you get.

Our whole society should be benefiting any day now, yeah?

One might argue that this war is a free hand-out to foreign interests.

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

Search: