News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:San Francisco Activists Are ‘Coning’ Cruise, Waymo Robota... by sonicshadow on Friday July 07, 2023 @11:52PM (#36641213)
So should we just start arresting annoying who results in a loss of revenue for a company? I didn’t eat at Carl’s Jr today, should I go to jail?
Re:San Francisco Activists Are ‘Coning’ Cruise, Waymo Robota... by veec_cas_tant on Saturday July 08, 2023 @12:29AM (#36641352)
This is more akin to disabling their grills so they couldn't sell food
Re:San Francisco Activists Are ‘Coning’ Cruise, Waymo Robota... by NoZebra120vClip on Saturday July 08, 2023 @01:22AM (#36641566)
Carl's Jr. has several workers and a manager right there to restart the grill and get it working again.

These coners are exploiting a simple hack that would ordinarily be nothing but a minor nuisance to a human driver, but it turns into a showstopper for an SDC, because there is no responsible human for dozens of miles around. It disables the car for an inordinate period of time without a realistic mitigation. It's genius!

Re:San Francisco Activists Are ‘Coning’ Cruise, Waymo Robota... by veec_cas_tant on Saturday July 08, 2023 @01:32AM (#36641621)
Okay, disabling self-serve gas pumps during off hours at a 24/7 station. Removing a stop sign in the middle of the night. Turning on the faucet in an unoccupied apartment.
Re:San Francisco Activists Are ‘Coning’ Cruise, Waymo Robota... by NoZebra120vClip on Saturday July 08, 2023 @01:56AM (#36641724)
The ethical difference is that none of your examples stem from an interference in public safety.

SDCs are rolling into active shooter zones, they're blocking police, fire, and hydrants, they're actively stalking pedestrians.

This is not some random prankery or vandalism, this coning is a non-violent statement in defense of human dignity and rule of law.

Re:San Francisco Activists Are ‘Coning’ Cruise, Waymo Robota... by JumpCrisscross on Saturday July 08, 2023 @02:20AM (#36641855)
> none of your examples stem from an interference in public safety

Blocking the sensors of a self-driving car is a hell of a gamble to take on the public’s safety. They shouldn’t be arrested, but they should be cited same as any petty vandal. They won’t, at least for the time being, because this is San Francisco.

Re:San Francisco Activists Are ‘Coning’ Cruise, Waymo Robota... by MichaelZuo on Saturday July 08, 2023 @12:25PM (#36645910)
No, it's clearly against California law, you can search the legislative record to see that Waymo and Cruise operations have been authorized.
Re:San Francisco Activists Are ‘Coning’ Cruise, Waymo Robota... by sonicshadow on Tuesday July 11, 2023 @01:50PM (#36684622)
Would love to know what law this is in violation of. Also laws can be changed if they're dumb.
Re:San Francisco Activists Are ‘Coning’ Cruise, Waymo Robota... by MichaelZuo on Wednesday July 12, 2023 @01:44PM (#36698617)
Did you miss the latter part of the comment? Waymo and Cruise operations in California have been explicitly authorized, i.e. written down on paper/databases, passed through the legislature that has binding authority on all of California, etc...
Re:San Francisco Activists Are ‘Coning’ Cruise, Waymo Robota... by seanmcdirmid on Saturday July 08, 2023 @01:44AM (#36641666)
If you don’t eat at Carl’s Jr, you didn’t deprive them if willing revenue. If you decided to bar their doors so others couldn’t eat there, ya, you should go to jail.
Re:San Francisco Activists Are ‘Coning’ Cruise, Waymo Robota... by manuelmoreale on Saturday July 08, 2023 @02:39AM (#36641940)
That is a very low bar for jail time if you ask me but I can understand your point. Don’t agree with it but I can understand it.
Re:San Francisco Activists Are ‘Coning’ Cruise, Waymo Robota... by seanmcdirmid on Saturday July 08, 2023 @03:10AM (#36642093)
Your comment instituted a tongue & cheek low bar for low jail threshold, I just went with it. These days you need to practically murder someone to finally get sent to jail (at least where I live). But if someone physically barred me from entering a fast food restaurant, I’m not sure why that wouldn’t at least be assault (assuming I tried to force myself in, of course then the question is who is assaulting who, that can get messy legally). But, no, you wouldn’t even go to jail for assault, or would get bailed out quickly and get let off by the judge.
Re:San Francisco Activists Are ‘Coning’ Cruise, Waymo Robota... by manuelmoreale on Saturday July 08, 2023 @04:45AM (#36642589)
Well if someone barred you from entering a fast food that would be assault, absolutely.

But what if someone was pretending to be a public worker doing sidewalk maintenance and that forced you to simply walk on the other side of the road and not being able to access the fast food?

That to me is more like an annoyance and a form of protest.

Re:San Francisco Activists Are ‘Coning’ Cruise, Waymo Robota... by seanmcdirmid on Saturday July 08, 2023 @01:29PM (#36646574)
Impersonation of a public official will actually get you thrown in jail, for some odd reason, much faster than assault will.
Re:San Francisco Activists Are ‘Coning’ Cruise, Waymo Robota... by zaphirplane on Saturday July 08, 2023 @02:52AM (#36642004)
Funny and i hope you are being funny, it’s the internet you never know.

In case you are serious, there is a difference between acting to harm (human, animal, building, company). Not acting to prevent harm, not acting to provide gain.

Stealing a burger, Reporting a burger being stolen, rolling your sleeves jumping behind the grill to help out

I’m sure a philosophy major can add to the list with a clearer argument