Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I understand your desire for hard data, and I'll admit I doubt it's there. However it's not that much of a stretch to follow from "babies survive better when people are watching them" to "it's easier to watch a baby when there are multiple people taking care of it" to "it doesn't have to be people, necessarily" to "what if sensors could do it" to "babies live longer because sensors are watching them when humans might not be".

Completely pulling numbers out of my ass for sake of argument, for every 1000 babies that survive just fine without baby monitors, there might be one or two that didn't, because mom and dad stepped away and didn't notice the kid stop breathing. Really, people survived just fine without seat belts. We kept enough of the population to survive and even thrive as a species even in incredibly dangerous cars. But now that we have them and we recognize their value, would we go back?




I was looking at the comparison like this:

we knew that many thousands of people were dying in car crashes and also that people wearing seat-belts survived crashes at a much higher rate.

we know that a small number of kids die but we don't have that same level of evidence that the proposed solution actually works.

That's an argument for doing more studies but not for buying a bunch of IoT stuff at steep prices.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: