Skip to content

Comment on Smoke alarms, fingerprint readers - why the HN community gets it wrongparent

Comments

Interestingly enough, the best solutions come from both parts working together. In this example, the conservative view is indeed correct, it is very, very dangerous if you could disable a true alert. However, the progressive view still has a darn realistic point.

But, once you combine both, you reach a really interesting third way: Don't do binary detection, do trinary detection if possible. "No smoke", "Some smoke" and "Ok this is completely fubar"-levels of smoke. "Some smoke" can be waved, Fubar-Levels of smoke cannot be waved and the user is informed of this.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.