1 HN user recommended this commentary1 month2015–2019score 1
Years with an HN recommendation, 2007–2026
HN uses it as an example of cost-benefit reasoning about product safety in threads on recalls, security spending and Boeing.
A clip of Milton Friedman answering an audience member about Ford's decision not to recall the Pinto, in which he defends weighing safety costs against benefits. The uploader's framing is strongly hostile to Friedman.
“There is an entertaining video of Milton Friedman discussing the same issues with an audience member” (HN, 2015)
Narrator: A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one. The example reminds me of this discussion[0] between Milton Friedman and a student. [0]: [this video]
Friedman discussion related to recall cost calculation.
Reminds me of this video from the 70s/80s about Ford knowingly distributing an unsafe car - "Milton Friedman on Ford not recalling the ford pinto" [this video]
>consumer shopping for a car can decide how much safety they want to pay for I have seen this argument before, by a Nobel Memorial prize in economics, Milton Friedman. [1] [this video] Overall he said, that it is not possible, as a principle, to put 'infinite' economic value into individual life. -- Perhaps the argument can be made, that in a different situation the 'other data' pilots were to use, would increase safety. -- Either way, I think there is something wrong with Friedman's argument. 'Optionality' -- when related to safety features, should be treated very different, than optionality in, say, comfort features. Passengers themselves should not be expected to make choices which optional safety features, on a car, a bus, or plane should be purchased by the drivers/operators. Drivers, should not be expected to make these choices, either. My thinking here, is that An optionality in safety device, should change the whole major (not minor) vehicle model number designation, for example. This would drive different visible profiles: different training, cost, marketing and so on.
Video list and Hacker News comment labels from HackerTube (prompted by @karpathy), released under ODC-By 1.0, built on the open-index/hacker-news archive. Hacker News data is provided by Y Combinator; comments remain the work of their authors. Video titles, channel names and thumbnails belong to their creators and are shown via YouTube. HackerTube Watch is an unofficial edition. Data export of 2026-10-31.
4 Hacker News comments
From the HN archive; up to 20 kept per video, favoring different commenters. Recommendations first.
Citations, criticism and jokes
Read more