back

by alexandercrohde·9y ago·view on hn ↗
Good. I'm tired of high-ranking high-status members of society dodging consequences of multimillion or billion dollar catastrophes while the lowest classes get life sentences for ruining a single life.

I think the only way to stop the white-collar crime problem (which I think is a bigger problem than the physical crime problem) is by holding people accountable.

4 comments
I agree, however it seems like they only use VW to exemplify the issue, when pretty much all manufacturers are cheating.
Also it helps that it is not a US company.
And it happens to be from a country with a strong economy.
I have not been closely following this scandal, so I was unaware that other car manufacturers have been indicted in emissions cheating. Could you share a source with more information about this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal#T...

A French government report in 2016 investigated 86 different cars, and about 1/5th of those were found to comply with emission laws. Most did not.

How many of those are sold in the US?
Have a look at this talk of the latest CCC at 13:11 https://media.ccc.de/v/33c3-7904-software_defined_emissions

He talks about how it is possible that the cars achieve the low results in the testcycles but produce much higher emissions on the real road. The reverse engineering in the beginning of the task is also very interesting.

The companion talk about how the Dieselgate cases are transpiring is also worth a watch.

https://media.ccc.de/v/33c3-8131-dieselgate_a_year_later#vid...

I was about to post this. VW have been playing dirty tactics even after the scandal.
He demonstrated the same for Opel / GM.
I thought it's a common knowledge most/all are doing it in one way or the other. Same as professional athletes in many sports, ie cycling - you cannot be really successful without any hacks/borderline cheating, it's more a matter of being few steps ahead of doping tests and current rules, thriving in the gray area.

I simply don't believe anymore there are any clean athletes in first 3 places in any sport where there are significant money involved.

And most people are happy to support this indirectly via their support of things like Olympics which became lately just hunt for sponsors. (I don't watch those anymore, rather will spend the time actually training, with friends, in the nature etc.)

Same for cars.

That's an interesting parallel
Wow. This makes me really glad I don't buy cars and don't patronize sports. What a load of crap!
Not even just emissions, lots of companies play software tricks to game efficiency numbers. Chevy and Ford have both played games with the manual V8 sports cars that locks out the 1 -> 2 shift and force the driver to go 1 -> 4 to save gas when the computer sees the car accelerating at the same rate as the EPA test.

The funniest thing was the Ford would sell you a software update to defeat skip shift under the guise of a "performance tune", at least that's how I defeated it while still keeping my warranty.

I was under the impression that unless you bought an aftermarket tune the 1 -> 2 (and maybe even 1 -> 3) shift was always locked out no matter your rate of acceleration. Has this changed in the past few years?
Not on my 2002 Corvette. First gear and low throttle opening invokes CAGS, the computer assisted hear selection.
You fell for it.. this is US economic imperialism, and nothing to do about emissions.
Maybe, but it's also justice being served.

When a poor black man in America is arrested for a rape, it's racism and classism because a rich white man is far more likely to get away with that crime. But it's also justice. I don't think you would argue that we should let poor black men get away with rape just to make things more fair.

It's selective justice. Imagine driving down in a 2009 Toyota Camry with your well dressed family on a well paved highway in Alabama at 78 mph in a 65 mph zone on a nice, clear sunny Sunday a safe distance away from the preceding car at the same velocity as quite literally every other car in every other lane you see. Clearly not posing a safety threat, not lane-weaving indicating any form of compromised faculties or dangerous behavior, no threat at all really. However, Smokey the Bear state trooper Bob decides he doesn't like the way you look. You could be black, you could be wearing a Ralph Lauren Polo with a NORML insignia on it and Bob just happens to hate pot, you could have an atheist bumper sticker and Bob just got on shift after a rousing sermon from Pastor Jedidiah. Justice imposed on selected individuals is not justice.

Ethically, were he to enforce the law to the letter with an egalitarian approach, the first person he saw as he got on shift exceeding 65 should have been pulled over. As soon as that ticket was issued, he should have done so for the next person, ad infinitum until he was off-duty.

In actuality, if every single arrested individual stopped one day and decided to exercise his or her constitutional right to see his day in court like that prep school[1] individual did, we'd see what would amount to be a DDoS on the system incapable of handling a caseload of such magnitude. Pragmatically, an ADA will use a very effective method - known colloquially as "charge stacking" - to intimidate the accused into pleaing out a charge he would likely beat[2].

Though I'm totally with you on the classist component - should Michael Jordan's son commit a crime, he'd be far less likely to be convicted than whitey-mc-Kentucky-Meth-Mouth Tim's son due to the same lack of resources afforded to him.

[1] RE: your rape scenario -- Compare this aggressive attorney http://edition.cnn.com/2015/08/28/us/new-hampshire-prep-rape... vs these less fortunate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Park_jogger_case

[2] Even more compelling is the motion for dismissal those defense attorneys could raise in aggregate on 6th amendment grounds. In the state of California, the 45 day cap could be breached fairly easily if all of the defense attorneys concurrently suggested to their clients to enter a not-guilty plea. You'd also see a marked decline in arbitrary traffic stops, as arresting officers would be forced to spend the day in court rather than in speed traps.

All this explanation amounts to stating positions in what seems like a fundamental disagreement, so I'm not sure how to dig deeper.

At some level I agree with you that justice unevenly served is not justice, but I guess what I'm arguing here is that justice is a spectrum rather than a binary. Justice served unevenly is less just than justice served evenly, but more just than justice not served.

When certain groups are exempt from the force of the law, while others feel its full weight, it is not justice, but rather a mockery of it.
See my response to your sibling comment.
> it's also justice being served

Is it really? All the diesel manufacturers cheat and VW cheats the least:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/sep/30/wide-ran...

http://www.theicct.org/news/press-release-vehicle-tests-show...

Exactly.
>multimillion or billion dollar catastrophes while the lowest classes get life sentences for ruining a single life.

Is the implication here that causing economic harm is the same as murder?

Emissions from Volkswagen cats above those permitted by the Clean Air Act (enabled by cheating on emissions tests) are estimated to have caused a significant number of premature deaths in the US:

> According to the study, conducted by researchers at MIT and Harvard University and published in the journal Environmental Research Letters, excess emissions from Volkswagen’s defeat devices will cause around 60 people in the U.S. to die 10 to 20 years prematurely. If the automaker recalls every affected vehicle by the end of 2016, more than 130 additional early deaths may be avoided. If, however, Volkswagen does not order a recall in the U.S., the excess emissions, compounding in the future, will cause 140 people to die early.

https://news.mit.edu/2015/volkswagen-emissions-cheat-cause-6...

while not defending the purposeful fraud on VWs part the cars are still less polluting than the generation they replaced. That number cited by the MIT paper is so low as to be not something that can actually be corrected for.

Great compilation of California pollution regulation that applies https://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/ld_ca.php#leviii

In that case it would make more sense to forbid cars entirely except for utility vehicles or electric cars.

Which the government hasn't done for decades, so it is a little hypocritical to make a big thing of the VW scandal.

I think this somewhat misses the forest for the trees - the case against VW and the punishment isn't over hypothetical deaths, it's about cheating the emissions tests and not complying with regulatory standards. In a tangential way yes, the goal is to increase quality of life, but that's not really the point of the case/arrests, nor is it realyl the focal point of the research done, which was more a study on just how much excess pollution was produced as a result of the scandal.

The FBI's actions have nothing to do with the MIT link.

Yes it would.

Unfortunately doing that in today's world would render them unelectable.

Emissions regs are the best our defective system can do, hence slow changes. That even those aren't being honoured makes it a big thing.

Of course many would rather see them start with fraudulent banking than fraudulent car makers.

At some point, "causing economic harm" stops being an abstract thing, and literally means children starving, adults going homeless and freezing to death in winter, or people turning into crime to avoid fates like these.

So yeah, billion-dollar white collar crimes are, IMO, definitely worse than murder.

A human life does have a price tag, just ask insurance companies. Conversely, negative externalities can be quantified in terms of quality-adjusted life years (qaly).
If you think of money as labor and say there are 2000 work hours in a year, then at $10/hour a $1 million waste of money is wasting 500 work-years of human life. 2000 hours/(365 days * 24 hours) = 22%, so that is 500 * 0.22 = 114 lives wasted on a fruitless project.

If a wasteful project is government, then you have the additional complication that the government ultimately uses police and SWAT teams to enforce the tax code. So $20 million / ($50,000 total taxes paid in a year) = 400 man-work-years wasted. Multiplying by the 22% time spent working above gives 90 years, which is close to the lifespan of an average person. So you could say a waste of $20 million is equivalent to wasting a software developer's life(assuming his taxes are $50k).

Murder removes the remaining lifespan from someone, so there is a sense in which it is equivalent to time spent on pointless labor, which is equivalent to money.

Though, you'd want to specify how the Volkswagen incident is a 'multimillion dollar catastrophe':

* Is it from the fines imposed? That's an arbitrary number in the law or from some judge. You can't blame Volkswagen executives for causing economic damage here; the judge or lawmaker seems like the responsible party.

* Is it from environmental damage? It's tricky to get a dollar number from this. You can try, but I'd have low confidence in the result, and chaining that with the low confidence in the 'murder<=>wasted labor' equivalence makes an unpersuasive argument.

* Is it the forced recalls? Here, the Volkswagen executives could be said to be responsible for wasted consumer time driving it to a dealership for repair, wasted employee time fixing the cars, wasted lawyer's time defending their case, wasted judge's time fining them, wasted regulator's time preparing endless reports, etc. But, the economic cost of just the recall is probably smaller than what the OP was thinking.

* Is it damage to the Volkswagen brand? I was recently shopping for a car with a friend, and one criterion was "Anything but a Volkswagen". Even if I don't care about the pollution, cheating makes them untrustworthy. This reduces consumer choice, which has some economic effects.

In what other senses can you say that the Volkswagen executives caused an economic catastrophe(and hence, robbed people of their precious little life cleaning up the mess)?

> 500 * 0.22 = 114 lives wasted on a fruitless project.

I think you made a math error there. Instead 500 work-years should equate to about 12 lifetimes (most people's working life is about 40 years)

1 000 000 / 20 000 is 50

50 work years or 11.4 years of time are wasted per $1 million.

Murder isn't the only "crime" that can result in your life being ruined if you're poor.
Pollution is murder (statistically).
Making cars is "statistical murder". Bad schools are "statistical murder". Selling cheesecake is "statistical murder". Enforce the laws you have to help keeping honest people honest, but please do not selectively blow individual cases out of proportion with gut appeal tactics.
You can decide not to buy a cheesecake. What am I supposed to do when the pollution limits in my hometown are exceeded basically the whole winter?
All these examples are regulated by laws that control the extent of damage done. Clearly the society believes that the existence of these is, after accounting for the positive and negative effects, better than nonexistence. But, skirting the laws in most of these cases can result in harm/death, and should be treaded as such (e.g. selling cars with faulty brakes, selling cakes with too much trans fats... a bit harder to say for schooling noone has really figured out how to do it well on a large scale).
To elaborate a bit more on that (because I agree with you): selling cheesecake is not a crime, even though foods high in calories and sugar are known to cause obesity which causes premature death. It's the consumer's choice to buy these, but since they are recognized as potentially dangerous, the government does regulate the production of cheesecake. There are ingredients you cannot use, you have to disclose the ingredients you do use, and you have to include a nutrition facts label that shows how much sugar and how many calories are included in this cheesecake.

What VW did was like a cheesecake maker being told they're not allowed to use trans-fats, submitting their cheesecake to the FDA for testing to prove it doesn't use trans-fats, and then selling a completely different product on the market that does include trans-fats, but not printing that on the label.

You're allowed to sell cheesecake even if we know it's harmful, you just have to follow some regulations to make sure the harm is contained to a reasonable level and to ensure that consumers are well-informed of the risks they're undertaking. VW cheated the regulations and lied on their label. Of course they should be punished.

>Making cars is "statistical murder". Bad schools are "statistical murder". Selling cheesecake is "statistical murder".

Yeah, the question is how much. Cheating on emissions tests is definitely more murder than selling cheesecake.

> Yeah, the question is how much. Cheating on emissions tests is definitely more murder than selling cheesecake.

Is it?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/0...

> Scientists are asking people across the globe to lay off sugary drinks, linking the consumption to an estimated 184,000 adult deaths each year, including more than 25,000 Americans.

I wouldn't expect cheesecake to fare much differently.

Cheesecake =/= all sugary foods. It's not even a plurality.
Not to mention cheesecake is not pumped into the surrounding atmosphere as a gas where you breathe it involuntarily!
As is reproduction, in general. Of course, there's little point in pedantry.
7% of humans ever born are not dead. Pedantry is alive and well here.