> You wouldn't accept a bread slicer that sometimes erroneously slices off your fingers, as long as it does so less frequently than people slice their own finge

> You wouldn't accept a bread slicer that sometimes erroneously slices off your fingers, as long as it does so less frequently than people slice their own fingers on average, would you? I'm not sure I understand where you're coming from here. Are old fashioned injuries with old fashioned knives preferable to newfangled injuries with newfangled equipment? It seems pretty straightforward to me that fewer injuries would be better, all else equal. Maybe you're imagining all else will not be equal? Maybe the new injuries are more severe, or more likely to happen to innocent bystanders, or something like that. It could be. But I think it's important to be specific about what we're worried about here. Otherwise "fewer is fewer" is all we have to go on.