3 ms·
My previous company made software for DOTs. Over the years I learned that DOTs assign a dollar amount to human lives/deaths when calculating the cost benefit ra
by rsweeney21 8y ago
My previous company made software for DOTs. Over the years I learned that DOTs assign a dollar amount to human lives/deaths when calculating the cost benefit ratio of implementing roadway safety improvements. It very much reminds me of the acceptable number of deaths mentioned in the article. DOTs don't like talking about this of course.
There should be a law that grants companies safe harbor for reporting and fixing defects in their product without the risk of accepting liability. Sort of like self-whistle blowing.
- Erlich_Bachman 8y agoIs there realistically any other way to do this though? The value of life, as estimated by a human in a generic situation is presumably infinite. However, companies, governments, regulating bodies, etc, have to regulate actual physical measures, which cost money, time etc- all very finite things. These agents need to act in actual physical environment like for example limited budgets or having to choose between two different safety measures. At some point the human life is going to have to enter that equation, if we are going to be talking about safety issues. How do you calculate en equation with finite and infinite variables without assuming a finite value for the human life?
- prolepunk 8y agoIn other words utilitarianism.