It'll void any warranty.

https://www.theregister.com/on-prem/2026/05/01/where-to-buy-...

It appears there could be demand for alternatives, even if viable alternatives do not yet exist

I also absolutely loath the coal-rollers and everything about what they do, and if I could snap my fingers and have them lose both their trucks and their licenses to drive with no other consequences beyond their frustration, I'd do it.

Nevertheless, we cannot allow this good reason for which be both agree to be used as a wedge to let the state just wholesale collect data for whatever reason they want.

Very soon, the reason the state wants to wholesale collect data will be for a reason we entirely disagree. That is not an "IF", it is a "WHEN".

So, no, this isn't a justification.

Very soon, that ca

Hey congrats, you discovered Society! This is what all those rules and shit are all about - your impact on other people, and their impact on you! It turns out that just saying “people should be able to do what they want” doesn’t actually solve anything, because other people also exist, and some of them are you!

This issue is just not directly politically important enough to get the "don't touch" treatment.

Donors and party power brokers aren't rolling coal.

They can deny a claim. You can challenge that, they will need to prove the modification caused the defect. They cannot void your warranty, in whole or in part. The most they can do is make a note of your modification and then use that as a reference going forward to deny individual claims as they happen.

You might argue that they are likely to win those claims, because they have the engineer who will show up in court to explain why your modification was the problem. On that I'd agree. But they'll have to do that for every claim they deny (assuming you take them to court).

I would not be surprised to see double sided phone cases so we can carry our big brother phone with our real phone.

There is some prior art in people being forced to carry a "work phone" and a "personal phone" at the same time.

There will be strange product marketing effects. If you only carry one phone, you can currently talk people into spending over $1K on a high tier big brother phone. But if you only use a big brother phone for bank apps and only at home, a $1K phone from Apple or Samsung is a hard sell, I'd be more likely to spend $1K on a really nice anti big brother phone on ali express or whatever.

Please explain to me how ICE (part of the nominally democratic USG) can be held accountable for summarily executing citizens.

On top of that, wow, if you're familiar with how humans think and how prosecutors write indictments, that's some weak sauce. Look at this:

> EZ Lynk worked with/previewed the EZ Lynk System for at least two delete tune creators during development and before launching the EZ Lynk System. Those creators later disseminated delete tunes using the EZ Lynk System.

They worked with some developers. No claim that they knew what the developers were planning to produce at the time. Later the same developers published something alleged to be illegal.

> There were numerous social media websites, including the “EZ Lynk Forum,” where third parties discussed using the EZ Lynk System to defeat emission controls. The Forum was run by EZ Lynk and one of the delete tune creators EZ Lynk worked with during development, and it provided contact information for EZ Lynk technical support.

Users posted things on social media. There was a thing called "EZ Lynk Forum" that wasn't even entirely controlled by the company and from what I can tell was actually a Facebook group. The group listed the (presumably publicly known) contact info for their tech support.

> EZ Lynk representatives interacted with posts and videos about deleting emission controls and installing delete tunes, including tunes from one of the delete tune creators EZ Lynk worked with during development.

"Interacted with" as in the company's peons weren't lawyers, so their PR flacks liked posts praising the company and their tech support answered tech support questions, without paying attention to whether the user was doing something they weren't supposed to.

This is looking increasingly like a farce. That kind of stuff is vapid. If a user has a tech support question and mentioning that they want to defeat emissions means the company refuses to answer it then the user just comes back later or with a different account and asks the same question without mentioning their use case, right?

These kinds of prosecutions are the worst. It's punishing a company for saying the wrong things, i.e. having insufficiently aggressive lawyers, even if it has no real effect on what they do. It's a trap for the unwary and a bludgeon against companies insufficiently bureaucratic to have all their employees trained in corporate censorship practices.

Your premise is that there is a difference in the product.

The product is a piece of hardware that connects your phone/laptop to the car's computer. Are you using it to program the computer to bleed the brakes, or are you using it to program the computer to defeat emissions tests? It's the same hardware dongle either way. A roll of duct tape isn't a different product when it's being used in the commission of a crime.

You can try to prosecute companies that actually ship the thing with software to defeat emissions, but that doesn't really do any good. People would just get the generic hardware from the store and the defeat software from anonymous third parties over the internet.

If you actually want to stop it, try one of these: The old style emissions tests, where they put the car on a dyno with an exhaust probe, have been mostly phased out because the equipment is a lot more expensive. Keep some of it around. Then when someone goes in for their emissions test, roll a D20 and if they get a 1 their vehicle is taking a trip to the full service facility and if the exhaust probe says something different than the car's computer their car gets a free forensic analysis to check for a defeat device. Finding one means jail time.

But really I think the government incentives are the root cause.

Fortunately I can still find workshops that care about doing a good job (more than they care about ripping off customers). But I feel bad for anyone who can't pick good services: which takes skill and costs time.

I never used VTNZ because I found them to be overly picky when I tried them. I thought VTNZ followed the rules too strictly and you didn't get any fair relaxation. I didn't know the history you have mentioned.

So it's a $30 burner phone, not $20?

With the exception of the Niskanen group, it’s true that none of these groups have much of an effect on policy in recent decades, but I’d argue that’s more of a consequence of our governmental structure shutting out those with libertarian views except when it’s in the service of increasing the wealth of the already wealthy.

There’s a large segment of the population that desires less control/intervention imposed on the Everyman, versus the Randian view that centers on freedom of action for wealthy industrialists. You can see this group present in any discussion about Flock, or digital ID, or age verification. Or problems related to copyright (an artificial government-granted monopoly). These people just aren’t well-organized and don’t have any political power. Their only representation comes from mavericks like Massie and Wyden, who often get marginalized by their parties, or outsider influencers like Louis Rossman.

The group I just mentioned (libertarian populists, perhaps?) is less likely to care about regulations on big intangible things like corporations, large-scale economic activity, or highways, and more likely to care about regulations that affect average individuals, very small businesses (especially self-employed or contractors), or small groups like hobbyists. They see many regulations as benefiting key Red or Blue donor groups at their expense, and it’s often hard to argue with that!

If you're talking about black smoke out of the exhaust, no it doesn't help reliability. If you just mean tuning to optimize not for emissions, yeah it can help if you know exactly what you're doing or screw it up if you don't, either way you'll only find out later. Doesn't seem to matter because most professionals already make their living without messing with their trucks.

idk who downvoted you, that's not appropriate, so +1'd you to avoid comment death

The point isn't that you can't run the deep research. Everyone now has more capabilities, and if you want to waste time and tokens you can do it. The point is someone has done the work compiling these, and made it available once, for everyone to read. Think "caching". It has the exact amount of information needed to show the details of every attack. There is a lot. Sadly making it "concise" will remove information -- there is that much.

I do usually make edits to an article after I get it from an AI, as an editor would do when a writer submits something. I hate having AI shibboleths like "It's not X. It's Y". So I make it more humanized. But at the end of the day, the article does what it's supposed to do: make people aware of things in one place, rather than have to research it themselves every time.

Don't like Meta or Fox News? No worries, they would have been broken up at 1% their current size.

As someone who is pro 2nd-Amendment (but not pro-gun) I of course appreciate this argument.

There are certainly gray areas. The most immediate example that comes to mind are bongs or other items used for smoking pot (maybe other things? I'm not too sure). Ultimately it comes down to what the government and regulators think, what they can argue in court, and so forth. And if the people don't like it, they can take democratic political action.

To a libertarian, a major part of the government's job is to enforce contracts and property rights. Externalities are mass infringements on other people's property rights, that need to either be avoided or appropriately compensated. Emitting CO2 does damage to a common good everyone has an interest in.

> No libertarian I'm aware of would force someone to purchase insurance.

I didn't say the government would force them to. (Though some smaller-scale voluntary association might well do so.)

>LineageOS + MicroG is a much better solution

Doesn't microg still connect to google? I'm not sure what your threat model is here.

Many more:

https://www.reddit.com/r/IdiotsInCars/search/?q=coal&restric...

Driving into a ploom of steam and smoke, while also being hit with fragments was terrifying.

Half-burned diesel particulate is absolutely cancerous, it can enter the bloodstream and cross the blood-brain barrier and they're generating clouds of it, probably thousands of times more than what a modern 18 wheeler puts out in half an hour of driving. And they're doing it to someone breathing hard.

If I sprayed some cancerous chemical in someone's face, I'd be arrested within the hour. I'd be on the regional news, even.

The double standards around motor vehicles never cease to amaze.

It’s always fascinating to run across the MAGA-style conspiracy theories on the far left, they’re ironically very similar.

“I get coal rolled every time in step on my bike!”

The fact is, emissions regulations in many ways have nothing to do with health or clean air. I don't drive a diesel truck myself so its not like I'm trying to defend my own behavior or anything. I'm a former automotive engineer who is unfortunately very familiar with the regulations and how nonsensical they are.

The problem with LLMs outputting English is that they're very good at bullshit and it can be really hard to see through the nonsense. The output can be skewed by the model parameters and this can be really hard to spot.

The compiler analogy doesn't work: compilers are (mostly) deterministic and I can verify their output if I wanted to, just ask the compiler to output assembly.

With code generation I can also more or less instantly see if the code is correct or not, because code has less words than human language. The same would apply to images: it would take even less time to see if a generated image is correct or not. That said, I don't use AI for image generation, since I have no use for it.

I'm seeing increasing numbers of people credulously citing ChatGPT/Claude/Gemini output as ground-truth fact. Many more are increasingly lulled into a false sense of security by the citations models append (to the point of neglecting even a bare-minimum skim of the cited sources, much less critically evaluating/contextualizing the nature of the sources themselves). My fear is that most people are blissfully ignorant at the new paradigms of propaganda that AI could enable; most of us here wouldn't be taken by the "slop" image-gen deepfakes (right now), but can you say the same about a couple of citations taken out of context?

We already know how trivial it is to win over a sizeable chunk of society by introducing red-herrings, misrepresenting statistical data, etc. -- oil companies perfected that art, and now as a result a huge number of voters in the US believe that climate change (doesn't exist|isn't man-made|is unavoidable). And that effort was "fully manual" and carried out without the aid of extensive psychological profiling at the individual level via an ad-surveillance complex. Today, society is almost completely defenseless against the extreme granularity/subtlety of manipulation that ownership of frontier AI models enables, especially when it's armed with even a fraction of the torrent of personal data that's being collected on each of us every day.

That's kinda fair, like it's still useful to prepare a list, but it's also like if you didn't go research your information yourself why would I start from a position of charitability when I read it? When I research something with LLMs, I know to double-check everything myself before I use it as a basis for my thought or repeat it to other people. Knowing an article is AI written forces me to doubt every sentence. Or maybe it's worse, I have to assume nobody cared about the sentence. The old format was a guarantee that someone gave enough shits to put the article together. Relevance comes implicitly bundled in each sentence. It's like someone talking to you in public in that there's often a reason to pay attention.

It's not as though that person is going to say something correct, or ethical, but I've had a lifetime of dealing with human kinds of wrongness. When stuff is wrong, I'll know it's wrong because the article is slanted or wrong because the author was lazy etc., which will let me discount it selectively and still get value from it when, e.g., a slanted author contradicts themselves. Reading an LLM article I have no clue whether the person who put it up even read the whole thing, so when I read sentences, I have no guarantee that the sentence communicates something worth paying attention to. I dislike that ambiguity and would prefer to guarantee that the text is slop by asking a bot myself. Then I know its worth upfront. I'd be fine with it if these sites included a direct statement in bold at the top: HEY THIS IS AI SLOP IF YOU DONT WANT THAT LEAVE. Then I know exactly how to parse it.

This is why you should write things yourself. There is no way an AI would write something so insane in response to that question. Since I can now read your true understanding of the world, I know not to waste my time on your ai slop. I have no reason to believe you fact checked the 'research' done using AI if you cant even understand how the research should have been done in the first place. You want to waste the time of others but arent even willing to sacrifice a bit yourself.

I thought this was some shitty way of being "special", like a loud exhaust, but being able to turn it on and off to gas people is downright evil.

Please provide a arXiv claim to back up your post or delete it from HN.

* New York

* Massachussets

* Vermont

In the real world, sometimes grownups have to actively do things to make their worlds nicer. We can’t all just sit around being cynical or nothing ever gets done.

What the startup does is make a verifiably trusted, zero-configuration, turnkey environment for businesses to move their data into and run AI workloads on, without worrying about their data being stolen, or some Agents doing unpredictable things. The environment is super-secured, with no ssh. It's an appliance, with over-the-air M of N updates. Think more "Tesla car" and less "OpenClaw". That's the foundation.

That environment then builds everything around a graph database, for people, organizations, and even code. We have Grokers that can ingest a codebase statically once, and then present the graph databases as a far better "RAG" than cosine similarity and pinecone vector databases.

At its most basic level: Agents can't be trusted. We want predictable Workflows, not agents. They can do 99% of everything Agents can, if done properly, and the remaining 1% are the dangerous parts https://safebots.ai/agents.html

It's a lot of innovations at once, including:

Collaborative Bots that are safer than agents.

Workflows and tools that can read, reason and propose actions.

Policies that must be satisfied before actions can be taken.

Logging of everything. Verifiable security and audits for SOC2 compliance etc. etc.

Everything is configurable and designed for serious businesses, not a grandma that finished a Chinese course on how to install OpenClaw on her terminal and not get pwned

My girlfriend almost got swindled by this. She needed brake pads and rotors, and they tried to slide unnecessary fluid changes and other stuff. Like replacing a $14 air filter for $120.

And the sheer amount of hatred he gets, alongside the threats. You'd think he was head of ISIS or something

These are separate issues. Both are real.

As one that has been hit and coal rolled, I'll stipulate that I have a biased take that would disagree. I get that people in Irving are probably not as used to bicycles, but where I'm at is one the most popular places for biking (white rock lake). So drivers in this area are definitely used to bikes. These people to me are the meme version of the MAGA crowd. They're also the people that have no qualms doing 50mph in a 30mph zone. Infrastructure or not, these people are these people

Last year the handbrake was like you say, only on one side. And the seatbelt mount was weak.

This year it uncovered two gaping holes near the suspension struts.

I can't imagine not having that inspected at least yearly!

Do any of these states even actually check for these things? Texas used to have required safety and emissions requirements. It was largely tires aren't completely shot and seem somewhat straight (alignment was definitely not a requirement though), essential lighting is functional (headlights, taillights, turn signals if originally equipped), wipers are OK. Emissions was a check of the gas cap and an OBD-II scan. For motorcycles there was a braking test but I never saw a similar test done on a car.

That said I think it shouldn't have gone away. Personally I think if you're going to operate such a dangerous thing in public it should have a lot of scrutiny. I've seen too many cars experience some kind of crazy failure from poor maintenance end up hurting others on the highways around me. Having a desk job at a window facing two major highways for a long time, you see so much injury and death, so much of it avoidable.

That would only be true if the government was aware of which cars were in the 95% ahead of time. The fact that so many cars fail means even the driver isn’t sure let alone the government.

Even cars significantly newer than the average age of cars on the road regularly fail the emissions tests without any obvious issues ahead of time. Which means without testing you don’t know which cars will pass.

As an example, your tire could blow out and cause you to hit a drunk pedestrian. It would be flagged as an alcohol related crash. Police are mostly interested in violations and liability, and you are responsible. Unless it’s a fatality, nobody will even ask if your failure to stop was related to poor brakes or bald tires.

In my opinion, the only clear stat is how many people are dead. Everything else requires domain expertise to interpret.

I would argue it's more effective to enforce stuff like this with mandatory periodical inspections than to leave it to random police checks. There are several reasons for that - the police are already doing lot of things, so they might not care; 'normalisation of deviation' etc.