[HN Gopher] Mats Jarlstrom's victorious 6-year battle over yello...
___________________________________________________________________
Mats Jarlstrom's victorious 6-year battle over yellow lights
Author : Garbage
Score : 121 points
Date : 2020-03-01 14:04 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.koin.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.koin.com)
| alkonaut wrote:
| Wasn't this guy fined for "practicing engineering without a
| license" or something similar?
| masklinn wrote:
| Yes, but he won that first-amendment lawsuit in late 2018:
| https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5671551-jarlstrom1.h...
| scarejunba wrote:
| Indeed he was, and it shouldn't really need to be a cautionary
| tale because that's the natural result of giving organizations
| like this such power.
|
| It's why software is so much better: no one takes certification
| guys seriously.
| wizzwizz4 wrote:
| Ah, yes. Software is _so much_ better. https://xkcd.com/2030/
| dexen wrote:
| Archived version, since access is blocked for european readers:
| http://archive.is/Sy521
| hanoz wrote:
| The original article is not available to me because "European
| Union visitors are important" to them, the archive version,
| miraculously now compatible with my dns service, features a
| Google captcha which is unsolvable due to being half off the
| page.
|
| Where did it all go wrong?
| scarejunba wrote:
| We know, don't we? In the past, people always knew there was
| a value exchange occurring when you got info. Now, everyone
| wants the info for free and complains when people don't want
| to give it to you. Well, that's the nature of systems with
| this kind of incentive flow.
|
| Really, targeted ads were a low-cost way of providing value
| to content producers which enabled a low-cost way for them to
| provide to consumers.
|
| Fixed cost barriers increase the cost of doing business with
| these predictable results. It's like creating a slope and
| then complaining when the ball you placed on it rolls down.
| That's just the nature of balls and slopes.
| chongli wrote:
| There wasn't a singular moment when it went wrong. It's been
| a long, steady decline. Hackers have gradually been
| marginalized and replaced by bureaucrats.
|
| I've been reading Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution
| [1] by Steven Levy. It's fascinating, but also heartbreaking,
| to see how things have gone, given that the hackers of the
| 60's and 70's were fighting against it even back then.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hackers%3A_Heroes_of_the_Co
| mpu...
| hanoz wrote:
| Indeed, it's sad to behold. That looks a good book mind,
| thanks.
|
| Anyway, as this isn't Bureaucrat News, I think it would be
| good if we all started to clamp down on links to articles
| on the quasi-web.
| CamperBob2 wrote:
| Well, to be fair, the transition between the hackers and
| the bureaucrats was greased by abusive MBAs.
|
| EU data privacy legislation wouldn't have been seen as
| necessary if companies weren't exploiting their user base
| unethically. The fight to keep the Internet open to
| everyone should have been an easy one for the "hackers" to
| win... but the other side had help.
| patrec wrote:
| Yup, all those FAANGS were founded and are currently run
| by evil MBAs. In reality of course, even Cook started out
| with a STEM degree.
| johnchristopher wrote:
| "Your privacy is real important to us and we would like your
| consent to rape it and share its remains with our partners."
| [deleted]
| gnicholas wrote:
| Referenced journal article, which hopefully is available to all:
|
| https://www.nxtbook.com/ygsreprints/ITE/ITE_March2020/index....
| [deleted]
| herodotus wrote:
| Quick summary: when someone is making a right-turn, and the light
| has changed to yellow, they do not have sufficient time to finish
| their turn before the light turns red. Therefore, at lights with
| red-light cameras, many people who could not possibly stop in
| time are getting tickets. (The point is that the fact that cars
| turning have to slow down must be taken into account when
| calculating how long it takes to traverse the intersection. If
| you are going at close to the speed limit, you get through while
| yellow, but if you have slowed down because you plan to turn, and
| the yellow occurs too late for you to stop, you will be long
| enough in the intersection to get a ticket).
|
| Mr Jarlstrom made many efforts to point this out to the Beaverton
| (OR) city council. Not only did the officials treat him with
| disdain, the state even fined him for practising engineering
| without a license. (Talk about shoot the messenger!)
|
| However, it turns out he was right, and he has been vindicated in
| an article in the Journal of the Institute of Transportation
| Engineers.
| calvinmorrison wrote:
| Fined for practicing engineering without a liocense.
| Institutions will always protect themselves but this is absurd
| tptacek wrote:
| Not really. I mean, fining this person was absurd. But
| licensing the title "engineer" isn't absurd; bad engineering
| gets people killed.
| masklinn wrote:
| > fining this person was absurd. But licensing the title
| "engineer" isn't absurd
|
| You can't logically have one without the other. If he
| claimed to be an engineer (which he acknowledges) and the
| state claims the title for licensing (which it did) then
| you can't enforce that licensing without some sort of
| penalty.
| detaro wrote:
| You easily can, by being more strict about what
| constitutes the use of the title of engineer.
| benibela wrote:
| What about software engineers?
| tptacek wrote:
| The simplest way to resolve that dilemma is to
| acknowledge that almost nothing we do is "engineering".
| ghaff wrote:
| You can also overstate how much engineering generally is
| about rigorous processes and theoretical correctness as
| opposed to heuristics and empiricism.
|
| I don't actually disagree with your general point. But
| there are plenty of examples of civil engineering project
| failures because of defective materials and the like and
| there are established practices in many areas of
| software.
|
| I've worked in engineering outside of software--and was
| even on track to get a PE--and a lot of that was pretty
| ad hoc.
| tptacek wrote:
| I'm still kind of haunted by this very concise and blunt
| argument by 'jcranmer:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22315607
|
| (I hadn't read about the KC Hyatt disaster before).
| kodablah wrote:
| Bad engineering shouldn't be related to use of the general
| English word, nor should it be used as justification over
| ownership of such a word. I admit I am unfamiliar with this
| specific case, but if he claimed he was an "engineer as
| certified by X" I'd be more sympathetic to X claiming he's
| lying.
| WrtCdEvrydy wrote:
| It's the same as saying you're a lawyer.
| ghaff wrote:
| In the US, if I say I'm a lawyer, I'm at least implying
| that I passed the bar in some state (although possibly
| not in your state). If I just went to law school or if I
| just read a few books on constitutional law, it wouldn't
| be normal to describe yourself as a lawyer and you
| wouldn't be legally allowed to represent yourself as one.
|
| People who have even grad degrees in some branch of
| engineering and have been working in the field for
| decades. But simply have never had a reason to get a PE?
| Perfectly reasonable for them to describe themselves as
| engineers (but not, of course, as PEs).
| kodablah wrote:
| More like saying you're a teacher in this case. While
| using that title to get around regulations teaching
| others in certain settings could be a crime, use of the
| word colloquially while generally giving knowledge to
| others (especially if you were a teacher where you came
| from) should never be a crime.
| tptacek wrote:
| _In this case_ , yes. But more generally --- the context
| of the top comment on this subthread --- no.
| Daneel_ wrote:
| Interesting. Here in Australia the red light cameras only
| trigger upon entering the intersection - if you're already in
| the intersection then that's fine. I wonder what the solution
| they'll implement will be?
| hinkley wrote:
| That's extra frustrating because if you think about the
| dynamics of an intersection, the person going straight through
| or making a left has a much higher chance of collision than
| someone making a right. There's a longer interval before the
| perpendicular traffic intersects the path of someone turning
| right, and usually all they have to do is take their foot off
| of the accelerator, if that.
| stefan_ wrote:
| Except going slower means you can stop faster, and considerably
| more so than the linear progression of time. So really the
| undue burden must be on people going straight through the
| intersection at the speed limit.
| herodotus wrote:
| From the journal article:
|
| "GHM's solution to regulate a yellow change interval first
| appeared in the 1965 ITE Traffic Engineering Handbook, and it
| has become known as the kinematic equation. However, GHM's
| solution is limited to vehicles traveling through level
| intersections at constant velocity, which does not include
| vehicle deceleration to execute safe turning maneuvers. This
| article presents a brief review covering GHM's original
| solution and Mats Jarlstrom's extended kinematic equation
| which allows for vehicle deceleration and turning maneuvers."
| csours wrote:
| By the time the yellow comes up, you've already made the
| go/no go decision, and you are scanning for pedestrians and
| other cars. You don't even see the yellow.
| lancepioch wrote:
| Where I live, as long as you're in the intersection before the
| light turns red, you're fine.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| In Oregon, where this all took place, that is not the case.
| slavik81 wrote:
| The engineering association didn't really fine him for the
| campaign itself. They were upset that he claimed to be an
| engineer when making his arguments, despite not being licensed
| in that state. Even then, they gave him repeated warnings
| before issuing the fine.
|
| In the end, the courts ruled in his favour. As a matter of
| freedom of expression, anyone can now claim to be an engineer
| in the state of Oregon.
| sjtindell wrote:
| Hah, the real world version of an internet argument I see
| time to time wherein people with engineering certifications
| are put off by software developers calling themselves
| engineers.
| wenc wrote:
| In some jurisdictions (like Canada), the title "engineer"
| is a legally-protected term. Someone like me who has 3
| engineering degrees -- but have not taken any licensing
| exams -- cannot officially use the title "engineer" on a
| business card without being liable to a fine.
|
| I can sort of see the intention behind laws like this, but
| I also think it's a bit of gatekeeping. The original
| intention was to prevent someone who isn't licensed from
| providing professional opinions and from signing plans
| without also being accountable/responsible for the
| outcomes.
|
| This is all well and good, except there are many
| engineering disciplines (outside of civil, mechanical,
| electrical... and even within them) where signing plans and
| providing professional-grade opinions are not the norm. My
| father was a practicing engineer for 30 years and has never
| had to sign a single plan, and so has never taken a
| licensing exam.
|
| A licensed engineer typically has an additional P.Eng. or
| P.E. title (Professional Engineer), and I agree that that
| title should be regulated like all other licensing titles.
| But the word "engineer" is so generic that it doesn't
| really make sense to try to legally protect it.
| akiselev wrote:
| Are you sure you can't use the title "engineer"? I
| thought it was only the very specific term Professional
| Engineer that is legally protected, and what someone
| looking to hire a licensed engineer would be on the look
| out for.
|
| Edit: According to wikipedia, there are plenty of titles
| in Canada like locomotive engineer used by a train
| operator even though the position is unrelated to the
| Professional Engineer license [1].
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_and_licensur
| e_in_en...
| wenc wrote:
| Pretty sure, unless the law has changed from when I took
| the required professional practice courses in engineering
| school. (I went to schools in Quebec and Ontario)
|
| That part you cited in wikipedia has no citations and may
| not be legally correct. This is something that is
| codified in Ontario law [1] (not sure about other
| provinces, but I believe it is harmonized federally -- in
| Quebec the title ingenieur/engineer is protected.). This
| law has been tested several times (example in [2]). More
| info here [3]. Even Microsoft had to give up the use of
| the term "engineer" in Canada after being hit with
| lawsuits [4].
|
| [1] https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90p28#BK43
|
| [2] https://www.peo.on.ca/engineering-licensing-body-
| clarifies-u...
|
| [3] https://engineerscanada.ca/frequently-asked-questions
|
| [4] https://www.canadianconsultingengineer.com/engineerin
| g/micro...
| slavik81 wrote:
| To be fair to Mats, I think he was a fully qualified
| engineer in Sweden. He was quite unreasonable in insisting
| on calling himself such in Oregon, but I suppose reasonable
| men don't change the world.
| qeqeqeqe wrote:
| I didn't realize that one's knowledge and skill is a
| function of location.
| crooked-v wrote:
| In the context of what was basically "I have been educated as
| an engineer, which is why you should be giving me more
| credence than a random person", I feel the use of the word is
| perfectly fine.
| WrtCdEvrydy wrote:
| In the real world, professional engineers are bonded and
| are liable for errors like lawyers.
| qeqeqeqe wrote:
| Are there many examples in the real world of this
| actually happening?
| WrtCdEvrydy wrote:
| Close to home... yes, the FIU bridge engineers could have
| been charged with manslaughter (https://www.miamiherald.c
| om/news/local/crime/article23659748...)
| [deleted]
| slavik81 wrote:
| The discipline notices for these sorts of organizations
| are always public. You can browse through the cases on
| their website [1]. Most of the enforcement actions
| against licensed professional engineers in Oregon seem to
| be for failing to complete their required professional
| development hours (e.g. [2]), though I did find an
| interesting case of a P.Eng. who was sanctioned for
| revealing client data [3].
|
| [1]: https://www.oregon.gov/osbeels/rulesstatutes/Pages/D
| isciplin... [2] https://www.oregon.gov/osbeels/Documents/
| FinalOrders/2019111... [3] https://www.oregon.gov/osbeels
| /Documents/FinalOrders/2019071...
| arghwhat wrote:
| Appeal to authority is generally not a healthy line of
| arguing. Only the argument itself should be considered.
| josefx wrote:
| A valid choice if you have the time to make yourself
| enough of an expert on any argument that gets presented
| to correctly understand and judge its contents. Most
| people do not have that time or even the patience to
| waste it when we have various ways to identify people
| that should know what they are talking about.
| mattlutze wrote:
| The Professional Engineer title in much of the United
| States is an additional level of credentialing and is more
| rigorous than just completing an undergraduate degree in an
| engineering field (though I guess some areas let you
| qualify with years of regular demonstrable experience).
|
| The Engineer license came up particularly to address
| quality control in civil engineering works [1]. So it's
| actually important to protect that, lest a bunch of folks
| start deciding they're qualified to give opinions on
| complicated structures or earthworks.
|
| 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_and_licensure_i
| n_en...
| Swizec wrote:
| We had this problem in Slovenia -- cars chasing yellow and thus
| creating unsafe intersections.
|
| Solution? Yellow means stop. If you run a yellow it's the same
| as running a red.
|
| You can only run a yellow if you're already in the intersection
| when the light turns.
|
| Despite the groaning and complaints from motorists, pedestrian
| impacts and high speed intersection collisions have dropped
| dramatically.
| robk wrote:
| This is dumb as why even bother with yellow.
| Swizec wrote:
| To give cars within stopping distance time to stop, but
| discourage them from accelerating to beat the red.
| clarry wrote:
| No, seriously, how does that differ from red?
|
| If you're in stopping distance and the light changes to
| STOP, then you STOP, no matter whether stop is encoded as
| red or yellow or both. So you don't need yellow for that,
| you can just give them red. They will stop.
|
| If you're _not_ in stopping distance and you get a sudden
| STOP sign, whether that 's red or yellow, well you're
| kinda fucked because you're going to end up in the
| intersection anyway.
|
| I don't see any rationale for having yellow with these
| rules (except to indicate that the light is about to turn
| from red to green).
| arcticfox wrote:
| This doesn't work though since you can't instantaneously
| stop.
|
| Imagine you're going 20mph/30kmh and the light turns yellow
| when you're 1 meter away from entering the intersection. If
| you try to stop, you'll end up stopped in the middle of the
| intersection.
|
| If your response is "in that case just keep going to clear
| the intersection"... That's exactly what the existing yellow
| light law is here that is being debated in the OP.
| Swizec wrote:
| > If your response is "in that case just keep going to
| clear the intersection"... That's exactly what the existing
| yellow light law is here that is being debated in the OP.
|
| That is my response indeed.
|
| The problem arises when you treat yellows as "clear the
| intersection" and you get people stepping on the gas who
| are 100m from the intersection. This often leads to high
| speed collisions and pedestrian fatalities because you now
| have a car that instead of just rolling through a red, is
| absolutely _blasting_ through.
|
| Or at least _blasting_ through a yellow.
|
| I see this scenario in SF all the time. Car driving 25mph,
| sees light turn yellow, speeds up to 50mph to make the
| light. Could've stopped in time if they treated yellow as
| "stop".
|
| This is obviously dangerous, but totally legal under "you
| can ride through yellow" laws as the car did in fact clear
| the intersection before the light turned red.
| rory096 wrote:
| Previous discussion (2017):
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14234223
| aetherspawn wrote:
| In Australia you only get a ticket if the rear axle passes over
| the line while the lights are red.
|
| It is very common for people to bank up an intersection and join
| the perpendicular traffic. Also we have left-lane-to-turn-right
| intersections.
|
| Realistically being in the middle of an intersection when a light
| is red endangers no-one. You're already there, so people can see
| you and aren't going to T-bone you. Even if stationary.
| snazz wrote:
| > Realistically being in the middle of an intersection when a
| light is red endangers no-one. You're already there, so people
| can see you and aren't going to T-bone you. Even if stationary.
|
| At low speeds, maybe. At anything above 30 mph, or at night, or
| with otherwise reduced visibility, it's still very dangerous to
| be in the middle of an intersection when traffic is flowing the
| other way.
|
| There's also no right-turn-on-red setup in Australia, which
| means that this situation is unlikely to happen in the first
| place.
| neonate wrote:
| https://web.archive.org/web/20200301140653/https://www.koin....
|
| https://archive.md/Sy521
|
| https://outline.com/TtHBpK
| stared wrote:
| Either
|
| "Our European visitors are important to us."
|
| or
|
| "This site is currently unavailable to visitors from the European
| Economic Area while we work to ensure your data is protected in
| accordance with applicable EU laws."
| oh_sigh wrote:
| Europeans decided that gdpr is a must. So their desires should
| be listened to. If the site isn't up to snuff, Europeans should
| be blocked until their wishes can be granted.
| yummybear wrote:
| But don't pretend they're important to you when you can't
| provide a solution after almost two years.
| drdaeman wrote:
| They just forgot to put the "/s" there.
|
| You know, as in "Your call is important to us".
| oh_sigh wrote:
| But they clearly are important to this Portland newspaper.
| If they weren't, they wouldn't have blocked the content in
| the first place.
| wutwutwutwut wrote:
| But if the site owners are so incompetent that they can't
| ensure this baseline for its US users, it shouldn't be shared
| here, right?
| oh_sigh wrote:
| US users as a whole haven't decided the same thing as EU
| users.
| MGP625 wrote:
| That's a preposterous statement. You are acting like if
| we EU citizens were asked about it in a public campaign,
| advertised in media, like if it was election time, but
| that never happened. You are blaming citizens when the
| people that actually voted are likely never going to be
| users of that site, your protest is misaimed.
| wutwutwutwut wrote:
| The fact that US users have no real say regarding these
| kinds of things doesn't mean that we should actively
| support these incompetent companies. That would be
| absurd.
| oh_sigh wrote:
| What percentage of traffic to this local Portland news
| station do you think are European users? How does not
| catering to them, but respecting their self-declared
| privacy standards by not letting them see the site, make
| them incompetent?
|
| Also, I don't really understand how US users don't have a
| say in their government, but EU users do.
| [deleted]
| pyuser583 wrote:
| Would formal verification be helpful in this situation?
| ska wrote:
| How? This is a question of policy, really.
| wwweston wrote:
| There doesn't seem to be much information as to the legal basis
| for Jarlstrom's efforts -- is there some Oregon or US requirement
| that red light cameras need to be "fair" in order to be legal?
|
| (Also -- would this extend to California? I received a red light
| ticket at an odd double intersection here I'm convinced involved
| a no-win situation, trying to figure out options, traffic lawyers
| of the ticket clinic variety do not seem to be of particular
| help.)
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-03-01 23:00 UTC)