Hacker News Reader

When you are in a medieval city every building is old.

The problem here is that the place was shut down for a year with maybe two weeks of work. This is European bureaucracy, not preservation of historic artefacts.

"It's a risk" means there's profit in removing the risk.

As far as insurance goes, it just reduces the variance. Folks who buy the insurance will take short-cuts elsewhere because money spent one place is money that can't be spent another.

And, if you're tempted to respond with "but it wouldn't cost much", my response is "then there's no reason why you shouldn't pay that cost."

And yes, I have a 120 year-old house that I'm keeping as authentic as reasonable. (I do want electricity and central heat.)

What have you preserved with your money?

If only there was an alternative to the finders of artifacts bearing the cost of preserving them.

You don't know the cost of having these policies.