Hacker News Reader

Comment by RobotToaster | Hacker News Reader

This was my thought. I can understand not wanting to go to the hassle of trying to explain that you're testing an experimental prototype robot to a confused Airbnb owner.

What I find inexcusable is not owning up to the damage and paying to fix it when your prototype goes on a rampage of destruction.

Moving fast and breaking things is fine, as long as you fix the stuff you break...

View on HN

> We are backed by Greenoaks, NFDG, Spark, Eclipse, Kleiner Perkins, Y Combinator, and many others who

are too broke to pay for scratched furniture?

> Moving fast and breaking things is fine, as long as you fix the stuff you break...

What? No its not. Breaking things can cause harm that is not always "fixable", particularly if its not your thing to break.

Well, that statement kinda implied what was broken has to be fixable, at least I thought it did.

And what is going to be impossible to fix or replace in a budget !hotel room?

Even if it is fixable, there are costs involved for the fixing. A broken hotel lamp will sit in a landfill for all eternity.

"Moving fast and breaking things" could be acceptable in cases where there is an ulterior objective whose potential value could be >> these costs, but in general it should be evaluated more carefully.

Fixing scratched hardwood furniture is an absolute pain.

In a rental unit you should not have things that can’t be replaced. People who rent it will break things, either by accident or purpose (there are always idiots around).

You don't need to rent someone else's house to test your robot. These people all live in houses.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com