Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by drcode 2302 days ago
Telling people they should wear masks because they don't put them on properly is like telling people they shouldn't drive cars because some people drive them into trees.
6 comments

I think what OP means is N95 masks must be properly fitted to the individual. When my wife started working at a hospital she had to undergo such a fitting. So unless you get the proper size, you could still be exposed. I think that’s what he meant.
> N95 masks must be properly fitted to the individual.... So unless you get the proper size, you could still be exposed.

I'd really like to know how often those fit tests actually result in someone needing to select a different respirator size or style.

I wonder if they're only needed if you're required to be 100% sure all your people can use their respirators with near-100% effectiveness. That's probably necessary if you're working in a contagious disease isolation unit or removing asbestos all day every day, but maybe not for less dangerous environments.

I am bookmarking this comment for the time after self-driving cars have become universally available.
Just remember to hold off on the gloating until after the self-driving cars stop occasionally driving into trees.
given the longevity of webservices online I bet HN is gone before that day happens
HN was founded in 2007, so per the Lindy Effect we should bet on it being around until 2033.

I don't know what your over-under on self-driving cars being prevalent is, so I don't know if this supports your point or not.

Looking at the current infrastructure and the current investment in said infrastructure. I think it’s a safe bet to go out 30 years or more before self driving cars are the norm.

In cities sure. Rural areas not happening. Add the fact people like to drive to Mexico Canada and Alaska I’d call it a non starter.

Example. I have a place where the road on google maps and the place people drive vary because rural Arizona uses washes as roads. Cars driven by humans get stuck.

A lot hinges on whether one considers level 4 or level 5 to be "self-driving".

I wouldn't want to own a car without a steering wheel, sometimes you have to do weird stuff like park on a specific patch of grass at a rural wedding and it's going to be easier to do that myself than try and convince a robot.

But a car that can a) handle 'most' driving for some value of 'most' and can b) safely hand over or come to a stop under basically all circumstances including a sleeping driver? That's actually a much simpler task and it's a very useful vehicle. I would want one of those even if I lived somewhere where road conditions were such that I had to steer it myself on a daily basis.

Like in Arizona, once you got to paved road you could enter an address in Phoenix and kick back in actual safety, without having to worry about taking over at a moment's notice. I think that's achievable in 10-20 years, and it could be less.

People have to go through 30+ hours of hands-on training, and an exam, before they're allowed to use a car on their own.

It's not just about putting the mask on; it's also about ensuring they swap them out regularly and don't self-infect in the process.

> some people drive them into trees

I wouldn't say it's a certain type of people ("some people" vs. "sometimes people"). You could argue for it, though seems like a hard argument to push.

Cars are inherently dangerous, because there isn't a reasonable guarantee that something will not go critically wrong (as opposed to, say, a train). Also, when driving a car, you're not only betting that you won't make a mistake, but also that someone else won't make a mistake (that would affect you).

I agree, but there are definitely people out there that shouldn't be driving that are.
Are you implying that Tiger Woods wouldn't put his mask on correctly?