3 ms·

>>operate on PDL because they never learned about risk in general Yup, humans are generally awful at understanding and managing risk, and it is in no small par

by toss1 4y ago

>>operate on PDL because they never learned about risk in general Yup, humans are generally awful at understanding and managing risk, and it is in no small part because there is almost anti-training about risk outside of high-risk activities, and even some of those are very low on guidance and high on PDL. >> I still wouldn't feel bad - that's the way they chose to live thier life. True, 'tho I feel like it is my better to not die soon-ish doing what I love, but enjoy many decades of doing what I love; doing it a little smarter and sometimes not quite at Warp-9 every second, so I can do more Warp-9 seconds later. I used to be an alpine ski racer, downhill my best event. At one national championship, the lower half of the race course was pretty flat and the race organizers decided to spice up one of the drop-offs with a bigger jump, building an illegal ramp before the drop-off (the FIS rules for Downhill stated that features cannot be sloped up before the racers leave the ground, level or down-slope only). I decided I had the knowledge I needed without pushing it on that feature in training so shed some speed every training run. For the several days of training runs before the race, every afternoon we were visiting friends in the hospital with fairly serious injuries from that feature (one back injury never raced again and never fully recovered). By race day, they'd decided to make it legal and shaved off the ramp. I have never felt that I missed out on anything by being aggressive on the top and skipping the Warp-9 attitude there...

dsfyu404ed 4y ago
>Yup, humans are generally awful at understanding and managing risk, Normal humans are normal at understanding and managing risk because normal is defined by typical human behavior. It is your expectations that deviate from the norm. (the above applies to pretty much all "people suck" type gripes)
- toss1 4y ago
  Interesting point; I'm not sure if we agree or not. While I've been very fortunate to have been able to pursue and get training in a variety of activities considered high-risk, I'm amazed at how often it applies to ordinary situations. Plus, an awful lot of ordinary life is much higher-risk than people think. We don't need extensive experience in sports or motorsports to understand that the difference between wearing a helmet or not in even a stupid little fall where your head hits something hard is the difference between "damn, I scratched my helmet" and your family organizing your funeral. This applies to everyone, and yet it is only this generation that is normalizing wearing helmets on bicycles, etc., and people still vociferously fight motorcycle helmet laws despite mountains of statistics of higher severe injury and death rates among non-helmeted motorcyclists vs. people who wear gear. While it is ordinary for most people to not only not understand epidemiology and statistics, a significant portion also willfully ignore the advice of those who do. Just because this significant portion exists, should we no longer expect people to either understand something or at least respect those who do? Most particularly, humans are obviously capable of understanding the difference between getting away with relying on Pure Dumb Luck vs applying knowledge, skill, technology, and attention to managing risk. Yet, just as obviously, MOST people haven't got a clue and consistently engage in foolish risks, and get injured or dead as a result, whether we're talking about YouTube idiots, people going to COVID parties, or in massive drinking binges, and nevermind understanding anything about engineering risk building bridges, aircraft, or whatever. It seems an obvious line to draw at understanding risk between using skill/knowledge/tech/attention vs using Pure Dumb Luck that the latter suck at risk management, and objectively most people are in the latter group. Moreover, I'd say more people are in this latter group, and the consequences are more serious, than in other fields, such as saying "most people suck at proper grammar". What am I missing?

by toss1 4y ago

dsfyu404ed 4y ago

>Yup, humans are generally awful at understanding and managing risk, Normal humans are normal at understanding and managing risk because normal is defined by typical human behavior. It is your expectations that deviate from the norm. (the above applies to pretty much all "people suck" type gripes)

toss1 4y ago
Interesting point; I'm not sure if we agree or not. While I've been very fortunate to have been able to pursue and get training in a variety of activities considered high-risk, I'm amazed at how often it applies to ordinary situations. Plus, an awful lot of ordinary life is much higher-risk than people think. We don't need extensive experience in sports or motorsports to understand that the difference between wearing a helmet or not in even a stupid little fall where your head hits something hard is the difference between "damn, I scratched my helmet" and your family organizing your funeral. This applies to everyone, and yet it is only this generation that is normalizing wearing helmets on bicycles, etc., and people still vociferously fight motorcycle helmet laws despite mountains of statistics of higher severe injury and death rates among non-helmeted motorcyclists vs. people who wear gear. While it is ordinary for most people to not only not understand epidemiology and statistics, a significant portion also willfully ignore the advice of those who do. Just because this significant portion exists, should we no longer expect people to either understand something or at least respect those who do? Most particularly, humans are obviously capable of understanding the difference between getting away with relying on Pure Dumb Luck vs applying knowledge, skill, technology, and attention to managing risk. Yet, just as obviously, MOST people haven't got a clue and consistently engage in foolish risks, and get injured or dead as a result, whether we're talking about YouTube idiots, people going to COVID parties, or in massive drinking binges, and nevermind understanding anything about engineering risk building bridges, aircraft, or whatever. It seems an obvious line to draw at understanding risk between using skill/knowledge/tech/attention vs using Pure Dumb Luck that the latter suck at risk management, and objectively most people are in the latter group. Moreover, I'd say more people are in this latter group, and the consequences are more serious, than in other fields, such as saying "most people suck at proper grammar". What am I missing?