arunabha (u/arunabha)

arunabha commented on California judge rules that Tesla engaged in deceptive marketing for Autopilot cnbc.com/2025/12/16/calif... · Posted by u/elsewhen

ursAxZA · 2 days ago

I’m not making a conspiracy claim, nor arguing that regulators are always reliable.

I’m describing a structural question:

Why was the terminology tolerated for years before being deemed unacceptable?

Regardless of whether one trusts the FTC/SEC/etc., two things remain true:

1. If the naming was truly deceptive from day one, early intervention would have prevented later misunderstandings.

2. The long delay created a regulatory vacuum in which ambiguity grew.

That’s the frame I’m pointing to — not defending regulators, just asking why the shift happened only now.

arunabha · 2 days ago

I assume because Tesla, via Musk 's public proclamations kept claiming full self driving was just around the corner?

If you're assertion is that the FTC should be much more sceptical of claims by corporations, then you have a point.

arunabha commented on 'It's surreal': How US sanctions lock ICC judges out of daily life irishtimes.com/world/us/2... · Posted by u/rendx

jameshilliard · 2 days ago

> The crimes prosecuted by the ICC are accepted by the US as matters of universal jurisdiction under international law, so the US can have no legitimate objection to (1) any country exercising jurisdiction over them wherever they are alleged to occur

There's plenty of legitimate objections such as not trusting a foreign court to appropriately decide international law.

> (2) any country exercising its sovereign power to delegate its exercise of jurisdiction over them anywhere to an international tribunal, like the ICC, either generally, under specified terms (such as those in the Rome Statute), or ad hoc.

In the case of Afghanistan, neither the US nor the Taliban are delegating that sort of authority to the ICC.

> And they certainly have the least basis for doing so when the country on whose territory they are alleged to have occurred, and who would thus have jurisdiction whether or not they were matters of universal jurisdiction under international law, does so.

IMO that's a pretty weak argument, especially when you have states being prosecuted which are non-signatories to the Rome Statute or are not full UN member states like in the case of Palestine.

> The actual objection is not the broad principle you are trying to articulate, but it is to the idea of Israel being accountable under international law for crimes for which it has the full support of the US government, irrespective of any theory of law.

The UN has a very well documented history of bias against Israel.[0] It seems entirely reasonable to me that neither the US nor Israel would trust a UN court, especially for anything related to wars involving Israel.

[0] https://unwatch.org/2024-unga-resolutions-on-israel-vs-rest-...

arunabha · 2 days ago

> There's plenty of legitimate objections such as not trusting a foreign court to appropriately decide international law.

So, which country do you think should decide international law?

arunabha commented on 'It's surreal': How US sanctions lock ICC judges out of daily life irishtimes.com/world/us/2... · Posted by u/rendx

jameshilliard · 2 days ago

> such as…?

Israel and the US for example.

arunabha · 2 days ago

Way to go not answering the question. The Romans has a pretty apt saying for cases like this

Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses

arunabha commented on Tell HN: The Python Software Foundation is now showing banner ads · Posted by u/inesranzo

arunabha · 5 days ago

I am not sure I follow your reasoning. You're complaining about a request for donation, on a site which provides a language and supporting infrastructure like a package manager for free?

Why shouldn't the PSF be allowed to ask for donations on their site? I'm sure if you're unhappy with them, they will cheerfully refund you the price you paid?

Oh!, that's right, you paid nothing and you claim that asking for donations is somehow 'enshittification' of PSF.

Frankly, the level of entitlement in your post is something else.

arunabha commented on Horses: AI progress is steady. Human equivalence is sudden andyljones.com/posts/hors... · Posted by u/pbui

DeusExMachina · 9 days ago

> why exactly do you need a deity to tell you to love your fellow man?

Because that is not a given, as shown by the entirety of human history. Without God, the only arguments for love, or what is right, is just what people think/feel/agree on at a certain time and place, which has a lot of variations and is definitely not universal.

> Do you need god in your life to want to love your children?

Most people don't need God to love their children, and the ones that don't might not be convinced otherwise by God.

That said, what do you do exactly for that love? Do you cheat and steal to guarantee their future over others? If not because of some "benefit to society" logical argument that would convince no-one, why would one even care about that and not exploit society for their own benefit?

Almost everyone loves themselves and their family above all others. Only God can tell you to love your neighbors and even your enemies.

There are still many societies around the world where most people are mostly self centered and you can see the results. You are taking for granted many values you have, as if you arrived to them logically and indipendently instead of learning them from your parents and a society that derived them from God for centuries.

arunabha · 8 days ago

Doesn't that only shift the question to what God wants you to do and in turn who interprets God's will?

Said another way, how would you conclude with any certainty that you are indeed following God's will with any action you take?

arunabha commented on US will now review H-1B applicants' social media – require them to make public businessinsider.com/us-to... · Posted by u/JKCalhoun

JuniperMesos · 14 days ago

Yeah, I would rather just abolish the H1-B visa altogether. If someone can, legitimately or otherwise, put together a clean social media presence to get legal residency in country, this still doesn't guarantee that their natural born citizen children won't try to work against the interests of heritage Americans using whatever tools are available a generation from now.

arunabha · 13 days ago

> heritage Americans

I'm curious as to how you'd define a 'heritage' American.

arunabha commented on India scraps order to pre-install state-run cyber safety app on smartphones bbc.com/news/articles/cly... · Posted by u/wolpoli

aiauthoritydev · 15 days ago

India supreme court is bonkers and often known for its BS judgements devoid of logic and law.

Aadhar is "identity", it is not a "card" of any kind though Indians have inherent love for collecting various cards for fun. I have my driving license, PAN, aapar, kisan and state government health insurance cards, labor department id card. I have few more in some drawer.

Once a person gets aadhar, it acts pretty much same as OAuth. You go to a hotel to get a room, Hotel by law is required to verify that your name and face match. You give your aadhar card to them which they scan on their computer and verify that your name matches your face. Because they are a hotel they have right to only verify that.

This is much more privacy preserving than what supreme court did. Because of Supreme Court, hotels no long bother to implement this and instead demand your passport and other identification, scan it and leave it in their system forever. They also are known to sell this data to other from time to time.

The technical idea behind was aadhar was similar to UPI. Government runs the core infra with basic APIs but private companies build apps on top of it. For example, say GPay builds aadhar interface where when you walk into a hotel to reserve a room, Gpay automatically generates a new aadhar number with permissions only to show your name, photo and age. Hotel system verifies that and stores a receipt. If in future government is investigating who stayed in which room, law enforcement can convert these receipts to identification.

This was a better model which would have unlocked a lot of potential. The government failed to argue the case correctly and supreme court acted more like an activist court.

I do think both Government and Supreme Court failed to show the correct user journey here.

arunabha · 15 days ago

> and instead demand your passport and other identification, scan it and leave it in their system forever. They also are known to sell this data to other from time to time.

Isn't this the problem vs the Supreme court judgement? Why does the hotel need to save this data forever?

A simple fix will be to make companies liable for leaks of personal data. That alone will incentivize then to delete personal data as fast as humanly possible.

arunabha commented on India scraps order to pre-install state-run cyber safety app on smartphones bbc.com/news/articles/cly... · Posted by u/wolpoli

jeswin · 15 days ago

I may have yielded, but that happened with the acknowledgement that it's not entirely a bad thing. Other IDs have varying levels of validity and authenticity; today I am of the opinion that countries like India shouldn't waste money and time on these. In fact, I'd say ditch the PAN card as well.

If Aadhaar makes it easier for people living near poverty to get say bank accounts, it'd trump the reservations I have. That's what made UPI possible - just about everyone today has UPI, even people begging for money sometimes have a QR code handy (at least here in Bangalore).

arunabha · 15 days ago

> today I am of the opinion that countries like India shouldn't waste money and time on these.

I agree that there are undeniable benefits from Aadhar. However, the issue is that the narrative from the govt has been that it's an either or situation. Either you have the convenience of Aadhaar, or you have privacy. This is unequivocally false. The solution isn't even technical. There are two simple, easily doable fixes which will deliver most of the benefits without significantly eroding privacy.

1. Ensure that legally valid ids other than Aadhaar are not treated as second class by any govt department. If a non Aadhaar id is refused, the reason must be given in writing. The problem is govt babus like the ease of Aadhaar and hence refuse to do the tiny bit of extra work needed on the non Aadhaar path.

2. Amend the Aadhaar act to ban the use of Aadhaar for anything except identity verification. If any personal data linked to Aadhaar is saved by a platform, then they are liable for leak of the data in the event of a breach.

Just doing these will enable the use of Aadhaar for it's original intent which was verifiable identity. The privacy degradation comes from using Aadhaar as a primary key for arbitrary storage of personal data, not from the existence of Aadhaar itself.

arunabha commented on India scraps order to pre-install state-run cyber safety app on smartphones bbc.com/news/articles/cly... · Posted by u/wolpoli

kragen · 15 days ago

Hmm, could you previously open a bank account, buy a SIM card, apply for a loan, or enter an airport without any of those cards? If so, I think it's plausible that the government responded by adding friction to daily life in a way that promoted Aadhaar. If not, they didn't.

arunabha · 15 days ago

My point wasn't that no id was required before Aadhaar. It's that any id from a range of acceptable ids like passports, ration card, drivers license worked.

Post Aadhaar, even though all of those IDs are still legal and acceptable under law, the govt has added so much friction on the non Aadhaar path that in practice those IDs are unusable.

arunabha commented on India scraps order to pre-install state-run cyber safety app on smartphones bbc.com/news/articles/cly... · Posted by u/wolpoli

ivell · 15 days ago

The friction already existed long before supreme court orders. No two departments agreed upon what ID they would need for doing the work. It could be rationcard, PAN, passport, driving license etc. Some organizations asked for more than one ID just in case. India just has too many IDs and it is asked for too many use cases.

Aadhar made it easier than before. It is really a quality of life improvement.

The main issue is government requiring IDs even when it is not usually needed in other countries. Mostly in the name of security. This is the root cause. Aadhar is just the symptom.

However Aadhar does enable deeper breaches into privacy due to its unified nature and the way it is validated through government owned infrastructure. There is full tracking possible on all the services that the residents used.

If Aadhar was a self sovereign ID, then having a single ID is definitely a good thing. It keeps privacy intact while usable where needed.

arunabha · 15 days ago

My point wasn't that no id was required before Aadhaar. It's that any id from a range of acceptable ids like passports, ration card, drivers license worked.

Post Aadhaar, even though all of those IDs are still legal and acceptable under law, the govt has added so much friction on the non Aadhaar path that in practice those IDs are unusable.