3 ms·

A pointed comment in that discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9881946 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9881946

Stratoscope 8y ago
Here's a mobile-readable copy of that comment... An omnious quote from an article on l0phet: > Wysopal offered this grim precedent: Cities were once vulnerable to disastrous fires, which raged through dense clusters of mostly wooden buildings. It took a giant fire in Chicago to spur government officials into serious reforms, including limits on new wooden structures, a more robust water supply for suppressing blazes and an overhaul to the city’s fire department. > “The market didn’t solve the problem of cities burning down,” Wysopal said, predicting that Internet security may require a historic disaster to force change. “It seems to me that the market isn’t really going to solve this one on its own.” > But here’s a frightening fact: The push to create tough new fire-safety standards did not start after the Great Chicago Fire in 1871, which killed hundreds of people and left 100,000 homeless. It took a second fire, nearly three years later in 1874, to get officials in Chicago to finally make real changes. [via https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9760164 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9760164]
ken 8y ago
Progress in fire safety was even more gradual than this comment makes it sound. About 30 years later, the Iroquois Theatre Fire (also in Chicago) killed twice as many people as the "Great" fire. That spurred them to realize that, among other innovations, exits should have an "EXIT" sign over them, and people should be able to push on exit doors to open them. There's always another accident, with new lessons. Some are bigger and some are smaller but there's never quite a single event that fixes an entire industry.

3 ms·

A pointed comment in that discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9881946 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9881946

by dctoedt 8y ago

Stratoscope 8y ago
Here's a mobile-readable copy of that comment... An omnious quote from an article on l0phet: > Wysopal offered this grim precedent: Cities were once vulnerable to disastrous fires, which raged through dense clusters of mostly wooden buildings. It took a giant fire in Chicago to spur government officials into serious reforms, including limits on new wooden structures, a more robust water supply for suppressing blazes and an overhaul to the city’s fire department. > “The market didn’t solve the problem of cities burning down,” Wysopal said, predicting that Internet security may require a historic disaster to force change. “It seems to me that the market isn’t really going to solve this one on its own.” > But here’s a frightening fact: The push to create tough new fire-safety standards did not start after the Great Chicago Fire in 1871, which killed hundreds of people and left 100,000 homeless. It took a second fire, nearly three years later in 1874, to get officials in Chicago to finally make real changes. [via https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9760164 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9760164]
ken 8y ago
Progress in fire safety was even more gradual than this comment makes it sound. About 30 years later, the Iroquois Theatre Fire (also in Chicago) killed twice as many people as the "Great" fire. That spurred them to realize that, among other innovations, exits should have an "EXIT" sign over them, and people should be able to push on exit doors to open them. There's always another accident, with new lessons. Some are bigger and some are smaller but there's never quite a single event that fixes an entire industry.