Выборы - пост-фактум
Update, для тех, кто, как я, совсем таки в танке. Выяснилось, что первый вопрос (Right to Repair) уже решен. Они как-то там договорились, и соответственно этот вопрос уже не должен был быть снят, но раз закон приняли слишком поздно (летом, а не до мая), то вопрос остается on the ballot, хотя ответ никого не интересует. Такие вот дела - можно отменить попытку понять "правильный ответ".
В дополнение, такой закон ни в каком штате до сих пор принят не был, мы таки впереди планеты всей.
Читая там же (на википедии), я увидела первую разумную конкретную критику закона:
Consumer Reports has expressed skepticism about the proposed bill, noting that its analysis showed the problem affects a "minuscule 0.2 percent of auto-repair customers." Consumer Reports also noted that the ASA (Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers) said the NASTF (National Automotive Service Task Force) had "mostly filled the information gap." Consumer Reports also argued that releasing "understandably secret details about vehicle security, smart-key codes, and engine immobilizer drives" would be a mistake.[3] The Highway Loss Data Institute also wrote in a letter to Rep. Bart Stupak an expansion of access to information regarding passive antitheft devices, it "would be naive to expect the security of the information to remain uncompromised."
In a letter requested by John Dingell, ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce committee, the FTC noted of 6,786 complaints relating to auto parts and repairs it had received between January 1, 1996 and May 16, 2006, only two complaints were relevant and there were "none relating to the inability of consumers or independent auto repair shops to acquire the equipment needed to repair cars."
В дополнение, такой закон ни в каком штате до сих пор принят не был, мы таки впереди планеты всей.
Читая там же (на википедии), я увидела первую разумную конкретную критику закона:
Consumer Reports has expressed skepticism about the proposed bill, noting that its analysis showed the problem affects a "minuscule 0.2 percent of auto-repair customers." Consumer Reports also noted that the ASA (Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers) said the NASTF (National Automotive Service Task Force) had "mostly filled the information gap." Consumer Reports also argued that releasing "understandably secret details about vehicle security, smart-key codes, and engine immobilizer drives" would be a mistake.[3] The Highway Loss Data Institute also wrote in a letter to Rep. Bart Stupak an expansion of access to information regarding passive antitheft devices, it "would be naive to expect the security of the information to remain uncompromised."
In a letter requested by John Dingell, ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce committee, the FTC noted of 6,786 complaints relating to auto parts and repairs it had received between January 1, 1996 and May 16, 2006, only two complaints were relevant and there were "none relating to the inability of consumers or independent auto repair shops to acquire the equipment needed to repair cars."