So your model isn't even mathematical, it's what, just a SWAG of the combined hazards and odds? That works for linear, small risks. It absolutely does NOT wor

So your model isn't even mathematical, it's what, just a SWAG of the combined hazards and odds? That works for linear, small risks. It absolutely does NOT work for serious risks, e.g., of death, serious injury, massive privacy violation, and other potential life-changing events. The concept you are clearly avoiding or missing non-linear risk. You (and amzn_engineer1) are advocating for simply subsuming risk assessment into the ordinary development cycle, and calling it "taking it seriously". That is fooling yourself. Taking it seriously is actually making full and serious effort OUT OF THE NORMAL DEVELOPMENT CYCLE for no other purpose than to SEEK and identify potential critical risks. It is then engineering a variety of in-depth solutions to prevent those critical failure points from ever seeing the light of day. And implementing them. and testing them. And monitoring them. >> I don't think it is an a priori fact that accidentally sending a recording of a conversation to a contact is a 'critical risk'. This is an exact example of this sort of failure: 'it's not a priori bad'..., minimize it and streamline it into dev. I really want to know in what world any sane person would say that it's OK to randomly divulging an intimate conversation to a contact or random recipient -- seriously, who would say that? I mean sure, most conversations are benign, but some could be utterly life-changing if revealed. and that's OK with you?