I'm pretty sure you're just describing type 2. At its basis, the article is just about some people being good at risk management and some having no concept of i

I'm pretty sure you're just describing type 2. At its basis, the article is just about some people being good at risk management and some having no concept of it. He connects this to dealing with humans, but that's just because humans are imperfect and illogical at times and thereby introduce behavioral risk. It's really just about learning to ask what could go wrong. You can then take that further by acting on the answer to that question and optimizing away that risk as much as possible.