Hacker News Reader

It becomes an arms race of safety. Are goggles enough? Shouldn't you make a robotic arm with remote camera and operate from a safe 100 ft distance behind a blast shield? (Cue Mythbusters) .

So nothing good comes of it, only an endless discussion of where the blurry line is drawn.

TL;DR - be safe. You should know what that means.

View on HN

I think the idea is that there is a theoretical graph where the X axis is "effort to act safely" and the Y axis is "chance of an accident" and it's shaped like a crooked L and although it plateaus, it starts out at a steep angle. So there is some point in there where a certain amount of observational safety is optimal.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com