3 ms·

Everyone entering a car today knows that given the wrong combination of events, they may kill someone, maybe even a toddler chasing a ball. Yet, millions of peo

Everyone entering a car today knows that given the wrong combination of events, they may kill someone, maybe even a toddler chasing a ball. Yet, millions of people still drive daily. Even cyclists are not free from that risk - when I leave later and take my cargo bike to pick up my kid, I might be distracted in the wrong instant and run over someone else’s child. I try hard not to, but the safest way to reduce that risk would be to walk. Still, I don’t. We all balance risks, even deadly ones, to us and others, all of the time.

XorNot 6y ago
We balance risks which have uncontrollable inputs. Not controllable ones for which we now have an answer. That's the difference. You note it right in your comment - that you in fact do take measures to be safe, and try to be specifically aware of elements of the dynamic situation which require attention. That's very different to say, if you planned on reversing a car and decided it took too much effort to look behind you before you do. Sure - chances are most of the time you won't run over a child doing this...
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  >Not controllable ones for which we now have an answer. We do it all the time? How far are you from the nearest fire extinguisher? Can't that number be reduced? That is but one example.
  - XorNot 6y ago
    Has my present distance to a fire extinguisher been implicated in a spate of house fires which have killed or injured other people? I as an individual can take the risks I choose to take with my life. I have no right to apply that to others though. In fact the building I'm currently in was built to local standards which mandated all sorts of things in relation to providing adequate control of known risks related to the spread of fire, and has smoke detectors fitted for that purpose. Because the builder of the house might have been okay accepting that risk for themselves, but we don't let them just pass it on to others.

XorNot 6y ago

We balance risks which have uncontrollable inputs. Not controllable ones for which we now have an answer. That's the difference. You note it right in your comment - that you in fact do take measures to be safe, and try to be specifically aware of elements of the dynamic situation which require attention. That's very different to say, if you planned on reversing a car and decided it took too much effort to look behind you before you do. Sure - chances are most of the time you won't run over a child doing this...

throwaway0a5e 6y ago
>Not controllable ones for which we now have an answer. We do it all the time? How far are you from the nearest fire extinguisher? Can't that number be reduced? That is but one example.
- XorNot 6y ago
  Has my present distance to a fire extinguisher been implicated in a spate of house fires which have killed or injured other people? I as an individual can take the risks I choose to take with my life. I have no right to apply that to others though. In fact the building I'm currently in was built to local standards which mandated all sorts of things in relation to providing adequate control of known risks related to the spread of fire, and has smoke detectors fitted for that purpose. Because the builder of the house might have been okay accepting that risk for themselves, but we don't let them just pass it on to others.