CA is a joint and several liability state. Joint and several liability is the legal doctrine that each defendant in a personal injury claim may be held responsible for ALL the victim's economic damages. Importantly this can occur if you are fractionally at fault.
You've parked 10 feet off the side of the freeway, 16 feet away from any lane. Someone is going 80 miles an hour, passing cars, then (likely) falls asleep and veers sharply off the road, then along the side of the road and hits your parked truck.
Even though you are fractionally at fault you are on the hook for everything.
From actually seeing cases first hand
1) If you have money
2) you have a connection to an accident however small, particularly a fatal one, and very particularly with any kind of sympathetic angle (wife and children bereaved and at risk of being homeless etc
then you will be named in the lawsuit. And at least in CA - even if the husband was 90% at fault (to a normal person the one who did things wrong). YOU could pay out everything
I kind of took for granted the fact that my customers are typically the party with the money by several orders of magnitude so I don't have to worry much about joint liability even though I live in one of those states.
You're definitely not wrong, "don't be the only party with the money" was one of the things my law professor drilled into us but for a consumer getting their car (or whatever) repaired they don't really have to worry about being the guy with the money since any shop will have a ton of money via insurance and insurance will have a ton of practice defending frivolous claims.
I also forgot the "anyone can sue anyone for anything, doesn't mean they win, doesn't mean it won't cost you money to fight them" disclaimer.
Perfect - the best defense BY FAR is to have less / little / no $$.
This is unique in CA - other party can be 90% at fault - so you’d think they’d have to pay (some states do whoever is 51%+ pays). But you can actually be the one paying rather than getting paid even if they hit you.
No its not, its the pure comparative fault rule followed by 13 states.
> - other party can be 90% at fault - so you’d think they’d have to pay
And you’d be right, if you suffered damages. If they were 90% responsible and you were 10% responsible, they’d have to suffer 9× the compensible injury that you did to net anything, because California is a pure comparative fault state.
> (some states do whoever is 51%+ pays).
Incorrect.
Some states do each of:
* Whoever is >0% at fault cannot collect from other parties (pure contributory negligence).
* Whoever is at least 50% at fault cannot collect from other parties (one modified comparative fault rule.)
* Whoever is at least 51% at fault cannot collect from other parties (another modified comparative fault rule.)
Let me give you an example - see if you can figure out who will pay and how much. The answer may surprise you.
Husband / driver falls asleep at the wheel while trying to speed home (going 70-80MPH). Weaves and then veers sharply off the freeway, hitting a parked vehicle parked well clear of the roadway and killing themselves, damaging the parked vehicle and causing pain and suffering to driver of parked vehicle.
Wife and family brings suit against driver and company owning parked vehicle for damages including funeral and burial costs, unreimbursed medical expenses, other out-of-pocket expenses, loss of income and financial support, loss of insurance coverage, loss of love, companionship, comfort, care, assistance, protection, affection, society, and moral support.
Questions you may wish to consider.
Family bringing case has no money - there is no chance of collection. Guy falling asleep and running off the road was only source of income.
Company owning parked vehicle has money - there is a high chance of collection on any judgement.
Who will pay out in CA. The guy causing the situation by running off the road and smashing into a parked vehicle at 80 MPH? Or the company owning the vehicle he smashed into.
In CA - the answer may surprise you. And the size of awards may surprise you.
Most states are either joint and several liability states or (more commonly, and as California actually is), modified joint and several liability states.
> And at least in CA - even if the husband was 90% at fault (to a normal person the one who did things wrong). YOU could pay out everything.
No, because California is also a comparative fault state, so if the decedent (for wrongful death claims) abd/or plaintiff (for any claims) is 90% responsible, other actors who might be jointly (for economic damages) or severally (for non-economic damages) liable would only be liable for up to a total of 10% of the resulting damages (any tortfeasor for the full amount under joint liability, or the amount of their proportionate responsibility for several liability.)
> Even though you are fractionally at fault you are on the hook for everything.
It is important to note that you can then sue the other at fault parties for whatever you had to pay that was above your fair share.
For example if I'm 90% at fault and you are 10% at fault in something that causes $1 million damages to someone and they come after you and win $1 million, you can turn around and sue me for for $900k.
I might not have $900k and so you might still end up screwed but in that case it is either you who gets screwed or the person you and I injured, and the idea behind joint and several liability is if we have to screw someone it should not be someone who was at fault.
Another part you are forgetting is these are often designed to save govt money. Should a rich person slightly involved pick up the tab, or should the kids be homeless and costing $ in social services kind of thing.
Note though that YOU can be the one 90% at fault and the person you hit has to pay if you are broke (wife will sue because you died ) Ralph’s grocery caught this type of case all the way and lost
Your choices then are Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, and Wyoming.
The rest either have pure joint and several liability in which each defendant is responsible for the full amount of damages (Alabama, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Rhode Island, and Virginia), or like California have modified joint and several liability in which defendants above some threshold fault percentage are responsible for the full amount of damages (Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin).
For front-end dev - some older developers are really tired of the constant churn. This can be a good thing if you can / already are off the endless new frontend bandwagon. But since a lot of junior folks are into the "latest and greatest" it can be very hard internally (and cement a perhaps resistance to change stereotype).
I'm a bit tired of folks saying older devs are not resistant to change. Reality - with experience some stuff just seems faddy at times over the course of longer career arcs. So yes, older devs can be bit resistant to jumping onto the latest bandwagon.
If someone learned lisp (or ML) in the 80s, very little from the “cutting edge” of languages would seem new at all. Likewise, most current framework trends have been around for decades.
I think the Junior mistake is searching for a programming panacea. While lots of bad designs exist, perfect designs do not.
Exactly this - people spend more time talking about frameworks than solving problems sometimes - the framework will not solve it and people have built huge / successful apps w rudimentary stack
Do you think the fads will come and go with lower frequency as more time passes? Software engineering is a young field. I don't hear a lot about, for instance, fads in aerospace engineering but that could be because I hear little about it in general. Perhaps software engineering is always going to be "faddy" because of how flexible and reconfigurable software is in general.
I think it’s the latter. Aerospace engineers do have fads like the aerospike rocket engine. Nobody’s launched one (that I know of) because it simply doesn’t work yet. The cost of failure is just too catastrophic. Instead, there’s a focus on the tradeoffs and lots of experimentation to get it right.
In software, if the prototype didn’t work, you tweak it and try again or even deploy with known issues and fix in prod later (looking at you game companies). If you had to throw away all your code and start over completely with each iteration like you do with rockets, you’d see more discussion and testing out earlier (in fact, you tend to see this more in critical software —- eg, the software that controls those rockets).
Finally, very few companies throw as much money behind business software as they do at rockets. I’d bet heavily that v8, .net, hotspot, or even gcc (metaphorical engines for your code) have only a fraction of the resources spent on a new rocket design.
Yes. Real engineers are responsible for life and death decisions in their designs. Software developers for the most part are not, and where they are, you don't see fads you see them using very long-proven and careful approaches.
One thing - software engineering is harder to measure than hardware. Have a new wing design ? Amazing strength at low weight - you can actually test your design and measure if it’s better.
That seems like something that would already be reflected on people's resumes, so it seems odd that a different photo would make a difference if that's the concern.
I don't know of an official source, but if you can just drive by a mill. I've been by two and witness first hand the pile up. I've driven by one mill two times a year for like 17 years and they have at least 10x the milled lumber stacked up. I've never seen it even remotely that full. I say 10x but it could be even much more. The other mill had probably 3-4x what they normally had.
Maybe because they have ratcheted up production to try and handle demand. A lumberyard filled to the brim doesn't mean what you think it means if that entire yard full is being sold and replenished every week.
I don't know about others, but the new Tesla Model S/X comes with a Radeon Navi 23 GPU which is basically a PS5 level gaming computer. You can play games on all Teslas. I think the traditional manufacturers are substantially behind when it comes to features / performance of the in-car entertainment systems. https://www.theverge.com/2021/1/27/22253258/tesla-model-s-ps...
Last week I drove a brand-new rented Golf VIII for 1500km and as the stack in in this ID does look pretty much exactly like this Golf's I'd say I can make a good guess about it. The system is smooth, definitely not janky, but also far removed from an ipad experience in terms of UX and control layout.
The UX is not very good. I sat in countless makes of rental cars and when there are tactile switches for core functions like climate control, I never had any problem whatsoever to use it without even thinking about it; even while driving I could say with confidence I can quickly adjust whatever climate control and not to have to worry about it. But here, to me, the strictly touchpad focussed input and menu layout was simply confusing. It's not intuitive where your paired Bluetooth phone options are, for example. The radio screen is a pain to use. I didn't dare messing with it while driving, and I didn't dare navigate through 2+ layers of screen to get to climate control while driving :/
Maybe it's bearable if you use that car on a daily basis and get married to it, but as a swing by experience, it's certainly not very impressive. Even the MINIs and BMWs I drove, with the weird spinning menu controller (at least in previous generations), where often better than the free form touchpad input in this car. I wouldn't know if anybody is able to make it better though (haven't driven that many different makes).
My question - what happened to microsoft in this space?
The get up and go speed of the super old windows forms approach was fantastic.
Now I'm supposed to use - XAML? UWP? WPF? Do these have great windows form designer still?
I'm talking speed between download and go with an GUI, a button, a text box (maybe data bound) etc.
This will age me, but for all the decades of "improvements" this tooling has, every time I've tried to do the little widget apps thing I used to be able to do trivially I end up wondering in the woods.
I'm pretty excited to see where the new .NET MAUI [1] goes. It's still in development, but it seems like it could be a great contender for fully cross-platform native UIs.
Paired with F# the proposed Elm-like model-view-update style would be the dream.
You can do the "WinForms approach" with WPF/XAML still, but once you got the ideas and concepts behind MVVN, observables, bindings, converters, collection controls and so on, there is absolutely no turning back and you start to miss that stuff on WinForms.
That's not all that IPv6 changed. There is a reason even places like google cloud have not implemented ipv6 (and these are huge scale players). They changed so many things around the protocol that you need new firewall experts, new configuration experts etc etc
Do you admin a medium or larger network? Despite the strength of your comment it also illustrates some ignorance.
"No way", "weird persistent idea".
This despite many reasonable people suggesting it.
Deploying IPv6 at scale is deploying a totally different protocal. What is irritating is that it's not just a larger set of bits, everything changed making adoption and tooling MUCH much harder.
"All the tools would need to be thrown out"
Totally and absolutely false. Because an extended Ipv4 would have the same underlying concepts you could modify the tools and continue to use them.
From address assignment (3 ways now) to the dynamic address privacy extensons (don't actually play well with IPSEC configs) to doing renumberings on prefix changes (100% nightmare) to all the training / learning new things (costs money in bigger orgs) they seem to have purposely made this change extremely hard.
Good news, I'm on board more or less with the migration at this point, and if I am a good marker of average reasonable interested in new things but not wasting tons of time then this is a good sign.
But boy they could have made this whole thing easier
If a business allows a nonprofit to use excess capacity, the capacity is still a business expense.
Google and AWS have huge amounts of unused computer capacity at low traffic periods. They can still expense those items even if they allow charitable use when not needed for business use.
Worst case if no unused capacity a business can call the expense a marketing expense and can ask the nonprofit to acknowledge their support of the activity. This is not uncommon.
I wasn't talking about AWS writing it off, but someone else buying that capacity to use for distributed computing for the CV. You have to donate to an approved 501C3 for it to count.
Given how poorly executed softbanks strategy has been I'm not surprised.
The strategy itself was maybe something that could work or was at least an interesting idea - but the way they've actually deployed funding has been wild.
I wonder how much more self dealing will show up in all of this.
CA is a joint and several liability state. Joint and several liability is the legal doctrine that each defendant in a personal injury claim may be held responsible for ALL the victim's economic damages. Importantly this can occur if you are fractionally at fault.
You've parked 10 feet off the side of the freeway, 16 feet away from any lane. Someone is going 80 miles an hour, passing cars, then (likely) falls asleep and veers sharply off the road, then along the side of the road and hits your parked truck.
Even though you are fractionally at fault you are on the hook for everything.
From actually seeing cases first hand
1) If you have money
2) you have a connection to an accident however small, particularly a fatal one, and very particularly with any kind of sympathetic angle (wife and children bereaved and at risk of being homeless etc
then you will be named in the lawsuit. And at least in CA - even if the husband was 90% at fault (to a normal person the one who did things wrong). YOU could pay out everything