Hacker News Reader

There are plenty of economic models that can support cures to recurrent issues. For example, internal sprinklers & smoke detectors have dramatically improved survivability of structure fires, but that "cure" supports a whole industry of sprinkler and alarm system companies.

View on HN

New buildings are continuously built as we developer new land or redevelop old land. These need sprinklers.

The companies mentioned in the article are all about detecting/managing a mega-fire once detected. If we "end" mega-fires, there's no business in detecting/managing them.

But, that's a pretty cynical view of these businesses. Maybe I'm just not jaded enough yet.

Pano will have a great business even if megafires are ended, since fire will always be a part of the landscape. One of their major usecases is monitoring controlled burns.

I never said things will not 'improve', even drastically, just not 'end' as the article touts. If sprinklers and smoke detectors truly ended fires happening (as opposed to mitigating the consequences), over time we would neglect them and de-prioritize them in the budget. Wy spend money on tings no-one has heard of in two generations when we have more pressing needs? Psychology and game-theory go hand in hand.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com