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

Yes, but how they got it is irrelevant. They got it, and that's what matters.

China can (and does) do the same for current tech today, through whatever means.

(Also, GP's comment directly said what you said; not sure what your comment adds to the discussion.)


He needs 40 other Senators to agree with him; 60 votes can close debate and stop a filibuster.

Not to mention:

> Unable to pay her bills from jail, she lost her home, her car and even her dog.

If this is the system "working", then the system is broken.


I'm usually a big supporter of labor unions, but police unions in the US generally have an outsized amount of power, and even when mayors etc. want to hold police accountable, the union ends up bending the mayor over a barrel.

I'm not sure what the solution is here. Forbid police from unionizing? That would probably have some bad consequences too.


Malpractice insurance

The GP seems to be suggesting that there's no recourse at all, usually. You might bring suit against a police department or LE agency, but you'll fail to find any relief there. True that qualified immunity only protects individuals, but there's a raft of other things that makes it hard to get a judgement against a police department, too.

I think there's probably one major exception: civil rights violation investigations. But even then, the people doing the investigating seem to be biased toward the LEOs.

The GP's linked article doesn't seem to even talk about this, so not sure why that's there.


> You might bring suit against a police department or LE agency, but you'll fail to find any relief there.

I don't know if I'd go so far to say she won't find any relief, but it probably still could be a pretty tough Monell claim against the department (although it's hard to tell from the sparse details in the article):

"[A] local government may not be sued under [42 U.S.C.] § 1983 for an injury inflicted solely by its employees or agents. Instead, it is when execution of a government's policy or custom, whether made by its lawmakers or by those whose edicts or acts may fairly be said to represent official policy, inflicts the injury that the government, as an entity, is responsible under § 1983." [1]

I could see a problem if there was a policy/custom of relying on AI facial recognition alone without any other corroborating evidence (would be a really stupid practice, but I'm sure stupider things have become part of a police department's systemic practices). Or if there was a failure to sufficiently train detectives about the erroneous tendencies of this technology. Maybe the needlessly prolonged detention without bail could be an issue if there was a lack of adequate protocols to expedite in a reasonable amount of time.

Either way, still seems hard to say this a slam dunk case for her, unfortunately. But also seems too risky for the city of Fargo to not settle, at least nominally.

[1] Monell v. Department of Soc. Svcs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978), https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/436/658/


> Many support its repeal.

There's nothing to repeal. Qualified immunity is a doctrine that the judicial branch made up out of thin air, with no legislative backing.

But agreed, we need legislatures to write laws that expressly hold police accountable, and declare that they are not shielded from liability when things go wrong due to their own failures and negligence.


Not that it changes your point, but, um actually:

While the origins of qualified immunity are judicial, some State loved the idea so much the went and made it statutory too. Louisiana’s 2024 bill explicitly removes negligence as an exception (which is a valid method to circumvent qualified immunity based on jurisprudence at the federal and most state levels). Louisiana requires intentional violations or criminal actions to even be able to bring a claim.


I mean, this is the USA we're talking about. Cops are given huge authority over everyone else, with poor accountability. AI just lets them pretend to be even less accountable. And by "pretend" I of course mean "get away with it".

Flying? We were solid middle class in the 80s and my first plane flight wasn't until 2001 (and then only because I was away at college and my mother had died suddenly). My parents hadn't flown since the 70s (before my sister and I were born), and even then, that was a rare thing for them.

Our childhood vacations were single-day (so we didn't have to pay for a hotel) road trips to a nearby state to go to an amusement park, or multi-day trips (also within driving distance) where my dad had to go somewhere for work and the hotel was paid for by his employer. It was a huge huge deal for us when, in the late 90s, we drove down to Disney World (a 13-hour drive) for a several-day trip.

And we never traveled around Christmas; that was one of the most expensive times of the year to travel!

Not sure when or where you grew up, but most middle-class folks in the US in the 80s didn't have a lot of discretionary income, and flights were (inflation adjusted) quite a bit more expensive than they are today.


I suspect your family was not as middle class as you think it was. You're describing a very similar childhood to what I had in the late 80s, but we were lower class for sure

I'm not saying that middle class families flew all the time in the 80s, but they absolutely could afford to if they wanted to make it a priority

A cursory google search seems to bear this out. Cheap flights in north america started in 1978 with some air travel deregulation.


GP claims their family was lower middle class not properly middle class. My family mostly traveled like kelnos family did at the time. Also gas prices in the 80s-90s were so cheap that it rarely made sense to fly over driving. We flew as a family twice as a kid because we were an immigrant family and we saved up to visit the country of origin but it was ridiculously expensive to take the whole family, so dad stayed home one vacation, and we always stayed there with family.

We did have a computer but it was really a one time expense. At the time computers were improving quickly so I scavenged parts which wealthy areas that threw last Gen hardware away but were better than what we had (and I was a kid with a lot of time on my hands.) Giving a computer to a kid for Christmas in '83 is a very different value proposition than even a family vacation because a vacation is something the whole family does.


They said solid middle class not lower.

My family was working class not even lower middle class.

And even we flew a few times in the late 80s early 90s, and we had a (probably used) Tandy computer that hooked up to the living room TV.

People have different priorities. We certainly couldn’t have afforded a current generation top of the line computer, and we couldn’t have flown every year. But an older computer and the occasional flight were firmly attainable to anyone with stable job if they really wanted them.


> We were solid lower-middle class

Yes, obviously a Tandy or C64 in 1990 is different, but anyway this thread is beating a dead horse. I regret even starting it. It's the kind of off-topic nonsense that HN is filled with these days.


We were solid middle-middle class and didn't have a computer until 1989, and it was a "free", 2- or 3-year-old computer from my dad's work that they were going to throw away. We absolutely could not have afforded a computer during the 80s.

Even in the 90s, we kept relying on cast-offs from my dad's employer, and when I was preparing to go to college in '99, my parents scrounged to buy me the parts for a computer to build and take to college. But even then, my dad bought the parts at a discount through a former co-worker's consulting company, and vetoed a couple of my more expensive component choices.

And now that I think about it, my first laptop in 2003 was my dad's old work laptop that had been decommissioned.


You couldn’t afford a Commodore 64 or spectrum? Yet were middle class?

US median household wage was $24k in 1985 and a c64 $150

More likely your parents decided to spend the money on something else. Like a $400 19” tv


You don't have to trust it. You can review its output. Sure, that takes more effort than vibe coding, but it can very often be significantly less effort than writing the code yourself.

Also consider that "writing code" is only one thing you can do with it. I use it to help me track down bugs, plan features, verify algorithms that I've written, etc.


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

Search: