4 ms·

I'm sure most people will agree. After it has happened. Then it's too late. Untill it happens it is definitely an externality to most.

by Dah00n 5y ago

rkk3 5y ago
Don't think this is the correct usage of externality... It's more that it's an acceptable risk, until it happens. Externality would imply the vast majority of drivers who are never involved in fatal accidents contributed to causing the accidents but did not suffer its consequences.
- Dylan16807 5y ago
  > Externality would imply the vast majority of drivers who are never involved in fatal accidents contributed to causing the accidents but did not suffer its consequences. Is that wrong? If 1000 drivers are being unsafe, are they not all contributing? Surely the one driver that actually causes a fatal accident doesn't absorb the blame from the other 999. And just about all drivers are unsafe sometimes and/or drive on roads that were designed with compromised safety.
  - rkk3 5y ago
    > If 1000 drivers are being unsafe, are they not all contributing? Surely the one driver that actually causes a fatal accident doesn't absorb the blame from the other 999. 1000 drivers contribute to 1 accident ??? No they are essentially independent events. Drivers can cause a bunch of externalities (Noise, Pollution, Traffic) but most are not causing or contributing to fatal accidents. And I would not solely blame the driver/participants in a fatal accident, you have to look at the system they are operating in (Car Manufactures, Road/Highway designs etc etc)
    - Dylan16807 5y ago
      They're not all contributing to that specific accident, but they're contributing to the rate of accidents. Getting lucky doesn't absolve you of endangering others! For a more extreme example, imagine a million drunk drivers getting on the road at the same time to drive a significant distance. Nobody has crashed yet, but many of them will. I would say they are clearly "contributing to causing fatal accidents". Would you not? > And I would not solely blame the driver/participants in a fatal accident, you have to look at the system they are operating in (Car Manufactures, Road/Highway designs etc etc) That's why I said "and/or drive on roads that were designed with compromised safety"
      - rkk3 5y ago
        > They're not all contributing to that specific accident, but they're contributing to the rate of accidents. > For a more extreme example, imagine a million drunk drivers getting on the road at the same time to drive a significant distance. Nobody has crashed yet, but many of them will. I would say they are clearly "contributing to causing fatal accidents". Would you not? It's like you are saying Shark Attacks are an externality of swimming in the ocean. That is not an externality, that is a risk of swimming in the ocean. Someone swimming in the ocean and is fine is completely independent of someone else who swims in the ocean and is attacked by a shark.
        Dylan16807 5y ago
        Road systems are pretty communal, though. We decide what safety systems to implement and what norms to uphold. I think 'externality' works well enough. Shark attacks are an externality of having such a strong beach culture, or whatever.
        rkk3 5y ago
        Externality has a specific technical meaning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality
wolverine876 5y ago
> I'm sure most people will agree. After it has happened. Then it's too late. Untill it happens it is definitely an externality to most. Wow, that's a pretty negative belief about human nature. IME, everyone I know is concerned and serious about it before it happens, though certainly they take more risks beforehand and of course have a much stronger response after something happens (or even after a close call).

I'm sure most people will agree. After it has happened. Then it's too late. Untill it happens it is definitely an externality to most.

by Dah00n 5y ago

I'm sure most people will agree. After it has happened. Then it's too late. Untill it happens it is definitely an externality to most.

rkk3 5y ago

Don't think this is the correct usage of externality... It's more that it's an acceptable risk, until it happens. Externality would imply the vast majority of drivers who are never involved in fatal accidents contributed to causing the accidents but did not suffer its consequences.

Dylan16807 5y ago
> Externality would imply the vast majority of drivers who are never involved in fatal accidents contributed to causing the accidents but did not suffer its consequences. Is that wrong? If 1000 drivers are being unsafe, are they not all contributing? Surely the one driver that actually causes a fatal accident doesn't absorb the blame from the other 999. And just about all drivers are unsafe sometimes and/or drive on roads that were designed with compromised safety.
- rkk3 5y ago
  > If 1000 drivers are being unsafe, are they not all contributing? Surely the one driver that actually causes a fatal accident doesn't absorb the blame from the other 999. 1000 drivers contribute to 1 accident ??? No they are essentially independent events. Drivers can cause a bunch of externalities (Noise, Pollution, Traffic) but most are not causing or contributing to fatal accidents. And I would not solely blame the driver/participants in a fatal accident, you have to look at the system they are operating in (Car Manufactures, Road/Highway designs etc etc)
  - Dylan16807 5y ago
    They're not all contributing to that specific accident, but they're contributing to the rate of accidents. Getting lucky doesn't absolve you of endangering others! For a more extreme example, imagine a million drunk drivers getting on the road at the same time to drive a significant distance. Nobody has crashed yet, but many of them will. I would say they are clearly "contributing to causing fatal accidents". Would you not? > And I would not solely blame the driver/participants in a fatal accident, you have to look at the system they are operating in (Car Manufactures, Road/Highway designs etc etc) That's why I said "and/or drive on roads that were designed with compromised safety"
    - rkk3 5y ago
      > They're not all contributing to that specific accident, but they're contributing to the rate of accidents. > For a more extreme example, imagine a million drunk drivers getting on the road at the same time to drive a significant distance. Nobody has crashed yet, but many of them will. I would say they are clearly "contributing to causing fatal accidents". Would you not? It's like you are saying Shark Attacks are an externality of swimming in the ocean. That is not an externality, that is a risk of swimming in the ocean. Someone swimming in the ocean and is fine is completely independent of someone else who swims in the ocean and is attacked by a shark.
      - Dylan16807 5y ago
        Road systems are pretty communal, though. We decide what safety systems to implement and what norms to uphold. I think 'externality' works well enough. Shark attacks are an externality of having such a strong beach culture, or whatever.
        rkk3 5y ago
        Externality has a specific technical meaning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality

wolverine876 5y ago

> I'm sure most people will agree. After it has happened. Then it's too late. Untill it happens it is definitely an externality to most. Wow, that's a pretty negative belief about human nature. IME, everyone I know is concerned and serious about it before it happens, though certainly they take more risks beforehand and of course have a much stronger response after something happens (or even after a close call).