3 ms·
I interpreted the bullet point about "tail-end consequences" as tail risk, i.e. a worst case scenario event with low likelihood of occurring. In the author's st
by jm__87 6y ago
I interpreted the bullet point about "tail-end consequences" as tail risk, i.e. a worst case scenario event with low likelihood of occurring. In the author's story, he mentions they only considered the likely consequences of skiing out of bounds: getting caught and getting in trouble with their coaches. They never considered the worst case scenario of dying in an avalanche.
- spacedcowboy 6y agoI guess what I'm saying is I think it's a distinction without a difference. It's a consequence - subdividing into "likely consequence" and "oh,shit! consequence" seems artificial. All that means is that you haven't properly understood the risk, IMHO :)
- jm__87 6y agoI honestly have no idea what you're talking about. Agree to disagree :) Edit: actually I went back and read your comment again and I misread the second part of your comment to indicate that I didn't understand something. I get what you mean, but I think tail risk can get ignored a bit more when you're quantifying risk, because it is very difficult to quantify.
- Terretta 6y agoInterpreting long-tail risk of consequences the same as long-term risk consequences is simply mistaken. A likely risk of time spent outside is sunburn. A long term risk of time spent outside is skin cancer. A long tail risk of time spent outside is getting hit by lightning.