I see where you're going, but how do you actually justify your choices? A: occasional random suicide (100 deaths/year), no other deaths B: no random suicide, 1

I see where you're going, but how do you actually justify your choices? A: occasional random suicide (100 deaths/year), no other deaths B: no random suicide, 10k deaths per year from normal driving You would be saying you choose B? It's not really about the exact numbers here - just trying to get on the same page - would you really weigh your uncomfortableness with "random deaths" highly enough that you would accept increased actual deaths? Another possibility is that the random death situation really is a signal of "actually hard-to-detect badness". If so, it should come out in statistics and we should easily be able to come to agreement in that case. But, if the choice really is between accepting "weird mistakes+lower deaths" or "status quo+many deaths" I feel pretty uncomfortable accepting the latter knowing the real-world consequences.