Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by 99112000 635 days ago
Did they have to add a label that the goods may give them cancer?
2 comments

It's weird how a smaller provision of a much larger work (Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986) are always trotted out as an argument against regulation. Like if you can't use the majority of the regulation in an argument against it, perhaps it's good regulation.

Although to the actually very narrow point raised, would you rather not know what substances were bad for you? Perhaps a lot of this is pointless as you will commonly see people saw materials without masks but at the same point would you buy carrots labeled with "This product is known to the state of CA to cause cancer?".

And to the rest of the regulation that isn't address by OP. It is very good that companies cannot just dump their cancerous waste materials into rivers.

What is this comment in relation to?
California prop 65
And how is that related to the post?
Prop 65 notices are a useless warning because they are slapped on anything and everything, just like this new law will result in a useless checkbox that people click without thinking.
How do you know that that's what is going to happen?