1. 7
  1. 4

    What a shame, we have the technology and the people to fix problems but it seems still not easy to pull it off.

    I also understand that someone could complain having their neighbour getting their pipes replaced but, at the end of the day, that shouldn’t matter in the bigger scheme of things. Otherwise we end up in some sort of tragedy of the commons where everyone is worse off as a result.

    1. 2

      The question I didn’t see answered: What was the false negative rate? Without knowing that we can’t say anything about which is the right approach.

      1. 3

        I’m not sure there can be “false negatives” in this context. I think the assumption is that eventually all of the houses should be checked, just in case, but the AI model was being used to find houses most likely to contain lead and deal with them first.

        Looks like AECOM is using brute force starting on the outskirts of town where the houses are newer and less likely to be contaminated.

    2. 1

      I don’t understand. Aren’t lead pipes safe after they have been installed for a long time, due to buildup in the pipes?