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

The UBI problem, and the problem in your post, is you're engineering starting from what you want, and then assuming that there must be a solution to get there.

You have to start with what you have and build from there.

This is a subtle point and it may take some meditation and thought, possibly ever over some months or years, to understand what I mean. But if you are an engineer, life will hand you opportunities to see what I mean. You can't write down a list of requirements, then assume that exact solution exists, and then burn for it full speed. You must always start with what you actually have and the options you actually have.

The thing that makes perfect sense to me, but you would consider ironic, is that while you may accuse me of this and that, lack of imagination, lack of dreaming, lack of belief, whatever, my way builds better worlds and your way builds failures. I don't follow this path because I don't also see the temptation to build dreamscapes and live in them, I follow this path because it's the one that works.




I am, in fact, not an engineer; I trained to be an actuary. (Though, I guess if one squints enough, the operations research electives look like industrial and systems engineering.)

I consider UBI less an engineering exercise with requirements that feed into the engineering method and more one of ratemaking and claim severity against an entire trade system. My only goal is to put a dollar amount on a loss event (and get some quantification of how many loss events occur over time while we're not looking). What anyone does with that is up to them.

Use of the second person was certainly a choice.




Consider applying for YC's W25 batch! Applications are open till Nov 12.

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

Search: