2 ms·

I think the point is rather that it's an unpredictable-stakes game. That is, if you make few enough mistakes, you'll be fine for a long time until you make the

I think the point is rather that it's an unpredictable-stakes game. That is, if you make few enough mistakes, you'll be fine for a long time until you make the wrong mistake at the wrong time and it kills somebody. Maybe a better analogy is driving a car, that is, nuclear power and self-driving cars are both vaguely like driving a car. However, my intuition is that nuclear power has less variables than driving a car. I say intuition because I don't know much about neither. I think the point is that self-driving cars trained on poor data are no better than poorly trained superhumans at driving.

perl4ever 7y ago
"However, my intuition is that nuclear power has less variables than driving a car." During the cold war they launched fission reactors into orbit. That probably had more variables. Then again, since the nuclear airplane project was unsuccessful, maybe that had the most variables of all.
- jwandborg 7y ago
  Well, nuclear power isn't harder because you put it in a car, but it's a great way to add to the complexity of the system as a whole. Putting a nuclear reactor in space (as we still do, I think the most recent Mars rover had one) greatly reduces the risk of it directly causing deaths, since it's really far away from humans for most of its service life.