Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Negligence in testing also needs to be disincentivized.

If they've BUILT a system where apps can interfere with the ability to place calls, AND NOT written appropriate exceptions for 911 calls to bypass all such interference, AND NOT tested such exceptions, then there's a huge problem. That is absolutely the regulator's business.

I can't speak to the way modern phones are designed, but in earlier ones, 911 calls have all sorts of special status. They override pretty much all the phone's self-preservation mechanisms:

Transmitter deck too hot, normal calls can't be placed? 911 overrides that; the phone will melt itself if that's what it takes to get your call through.

Battery too low, normal call would be dropped so the phone can shut itself down without corrupting its flash filesystem? 911 overrides that, it will run until the circuitry physically ceases to function, in case that buys you a few more minutes of contact with the operator who might save your life.

Power control? Some phones would allow higher wattage when docked in a car-kit, but limit themselves to a lower power level when hand-held, to comply with tissue absorption regulations. Guess what limits go out the window when you call 911! Of course it's not gonna use the power unless it needs it, but if weak signal would cause a normal call to drop, 911 calls can tap into extra capability.

They will do ANYTHING to make that call go through.

And for software to fuck it up in the name of some obscure feature that clearly didn't get adequate testing, is unconscionable and spits in the face of literal decades of engineering effort.



Consider applying for YC's Winter 2027 batch! Applications are open till November 2.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: