3 ms·
It's all about perspective. If 1M people a year die in auto accidents and you improve that by dropping it to 100K a year, you've done something worthwhile with
by kordless 10y ago
It's all about perspective. If 1M people a year die in auto accidents and you improve that by dropping it to 100K a year, you've done something worthwhile with technology. But, once it's 100K, taking it to 10K deaths a year is 10X as hard of a problem. Etc.
What I'm saying is that there are diminishing returns on eliminating all accidents, unless you are continuously elevating someone's life to an infinite value (your own, for example).
Is our expectation at some point that ZERO people of INFINITE value die shuttling themselves physically around this planet every a year? I'd be willing to accept a small chance of death (by contract even) if I always got to my appointments on time. Think of it as a fancy donor card.
- sokoloff 10y agoIs the second 90% reduction really 10X as hard as the first 90% reduction? That doesn't seem at all obvious to me. Sure, each 100 death reduction is harder, but the pace of progress seems it should be about a straight line when graphed semi-log.