3 ms·
Well, an obvious question to ask is if you are honestly prepared that it is your or your relatives' lives, that are lost in the name of progress / long term gai
by eternal_july 9y ago
Well, an obvious question to ask is if you are honestly prepared that it is your or your relatives' lives, that are lost in the name of progress / long term gain?
Perhaps, it is easier to speak of things like "short term life lost vs long term life's saved", as long as it is other people losing lives.
- kolinko 9y agoTo rephrase the question - are you prepared to slightly increase chances of injury of your family for the next 5-10 years, if leads to drastically increasing their safety after 5-10 years, and forever after? You have to be quite shortsighted to say "no".
- mijamo 9y agoThis is not rephrasing, this is changing the question to something completely different and wrong. In addition, not providing any data there or alternative is just misleading. Ex: I would NOT accept increasing the risk by 10 in the next 5 years to reduce it by 30% afterwards. I would NOT accept increasing the risk by 2 during 5 years if we could instead just increase it by 5% during 10 years and get the same result. I would NOT accept even having the same probability if we could first learn more and take 2 more years and a few billions to get a more stable technology before launch.
- emiliobumachar 9y agoThe point is, the "what if it is your family" appeal goes both ways. The downside of a laissez-faire policy towards self-driving cars could fall on anyone, but so does the upside.
- rayiner 9y agoThat’s basically inviting the reader to discard their rationality and answer emotionally.