3 ms·

This is why an architect and/or engineer(s) supervise a general contractor. A few things have changed in the construction industry over the last 3800 years. I’

This is why an architect and/or engineer(s) supervise a general contractor. A few things have changed in the construction industry over the last 3800 years. I’m not sure why I even bother reading HN threads about construction.

Dylan16807 3y ago
And if you don't supervise well enough, should it be legally fine to give you a defective house? If yes, that's a horrible idea. If no, then I don't see how "things have changed" in a way that's relevant to the comment you replied to.
- quickthrowman 3y ago
  Please respond in good faith instead of trying to ‘gotcha’ me. There are building inspections periodically during construction by the authority having jurisdiction, with the important trades (MEP, civil, structural) having their own specialized inspections. When you buy a new house (or a new building), you will receive a warranty for workmanship from the builder who should have corresponding workmanship warranties for all their subcontractors, and the materials will also have warranties from the manufacturer. Lastly, you can sue the builder if all other options are exhausted.
  - Dylan16807 3y ago
    If I was trying to 'gotcha' you I wouldn't have the if-yes, if-no section. I legitimately couldn't figure out your point. I still don't know what it is because those inspections serve the same purpose and while the mechanism is different I don't see how those differences are relevant. As a reminder, the argument above was "It's fucked up that you have problem with society and you think the way to solve it is building code." followed by a citation for how many thousands of years building codes have been around to counter bad work. And you're saying that the ancient blunt building code has been replaced with... another kind of building code. So what's wrong with the citation you replied to? Doesn't it serve the purpose of establishing building codes as normal? Why does it make you despair for HN's knowledge of construction? It's pretty clear they weren't suggesting current law works the same way.

Dylan16807 3y ago

And if you don't supervise well enough, should it be legally fine to give you a defective house? If yes, that's a horrible idea. If no, then I don't see how "things have changed" in a way that's relevant to the comment you replied to.

quickthrowman 3y ago
Please respond in good faith instead of trying to ‘gotcha’ me. There are building inspections periodically during construction by the authority having jurisdiction, with the important trades (MEP, civil, structural) having their own specialized inspections. When you buy a new house (or a new building), you will receive a warranty for workmanship from the builder who should have corresponding workmanship warranties for all their subcontractors, and the materials will also have warranties from the manufacturer. Lastly, you can sue the builder if all other options are exhausted.
- Dylan16807 3y ago
  If I was trying to 'gotcha' you I wouldn't have the if-yes, if-no section. I legitimately couldn't figure out your point. I still don't know what it is because those inspections serve the same purpose and while the mechanism is different I don't see how those differences are relevant. As a reminder, the argument above was "It's fucked up that you have problem with society and you think the way to solve it is building code." followed by a citation for how many thousands of years building codes have been around to counter bad work. And you're saying that the ancient blunt building code has been replaced with... another kind of building code. So what's wrong with the citation you replied to? Doesn't it serve the purpose of establishing building codes as normal? Why does it make you despair for HN's knowledge of construction? It's pretty clear they weren't suggesting current law works the same way.