4 ms·

Isn't that basically arguing "Don't talk to me about statistics, I want to talk about this one specific data point"? Bridges on the whole are pretty clearly be

by ajross 3y ago

Isn't that basically arguing "Don't talk to me about statistics, I want to talk about this one specific data point"? Bridges on the whole are pretty clearly better built and safer today then they were 130 years ago. I don't think there's any significant argument to the contrary. There are outliers in both directions, obviously. The old one at this site looks like it was pretty great. The new one sucked. That doesn't say much about why that was true, just that it was.

rdtsc 3y ago
> Isn't that basically arguing "Don't talk to me about statistics, I want to talk about this one specific data point"? For sure, we can each talk about different things. I can talk about ironic things and you can talk about statistics, and we can still be friends! > That doesn't say much about why that was true, just that it was. Well, why do you think it sucked?
mannykannot 3y ago
> Isn't that basically arguing "Don't talk to me about statistics, I want to talk about this one specific data point"? And why not? In this particular case, the statistics did not justify the expectation that this bridge would be at least as robust as the one it replaced. There's a general point to be made about engineering progress, but here we have a case which bucks the trend. Speaking in generalities when the topic is a specific incident is a way of missing the point.
Aeolun 3y ago
On the whole they may be better built, but the same design in steel would likely not have failed? I guess that’s what they’re going for when they say aesthetics had too much of a focus?
- ajross 3y ago
  > On the whole they may be better built, but the same design in steel would likely not have failed? I don't see how that follows? Lots of steel bridges have failed over the past 130 years. The overwhelming majority of new-built bridges or any material don't fail. People really, really want this to be about "aesthetics" because it confirms their priors about being smarter than the rest of the world or whatever. I'm just saying that's 100% bunk and that there's zero evidence for that hypothesis. Architecture has had a "strong focus on aesthetics" since the very first stones were piled up to make a temple. Let's not get ahead of ourselves here.
  - loeg 3y ago
    Another recent example that isn't wood: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_International_University_pedestrian_bridge_collapse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_International_Universi...
    - gpderetta 3y ago
      Another famous one: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Ponte_Morandi_collapse https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Ponte_Morandi_collapse
SuperNinKenDo 3y ago
There's nothing in statistics that helps you build a bridge.

by ajross 3y ago

rdtsc 3y ago

> Isn't that basically arguing "Don't talk to me about statistics, I want to talk about this one specific data point"? For sure, we can each talk about different things. I can talk about ironic things and you can talk about statistics, and we can still be friends! > That doesn't say much about why that was true, just that it was. Well, why do you think it sucked?

mannykannot 3y ago

> Isn't that basically arguing "Don't talk to me about statistics, I want to talk about this one specific data point"? And why not? In this particular case, the statistics did not justify the expectation that this bridge would be at least as robust as the one it replaced. There's a general point to be made about engineering progress, but here we have a case which bucks the trend. Speaking in generalities when the topic is a specific incident is a way of missing the point.

Aeolun 3y ago

On the whole they may be better built, but the same design in steel would likely not have failed? I guess that’s what they’re going for when they say aesthetics had too much of a focus?

ajross 3y ago
> On the whole they may be better built, but the same design in steel would likely not have failed? I don't see how that follows? Lots of steel bridges have failed over the past 130 years. The overwhelming majority of new-built bridges or any material don't fail. People really, really want this to be about "aesthetics" because it confirms their priors about being smarter than the rest of the world or whatever. I'm just saying that's 100% bunk and that there's zero evidence for that hypothesis. Architecture has had a "strong focus on aesthetics" since the very first stones were piled up to make a temple. Let's not get ahead of ourselves here.
- loeg 3y ago
  Another recent example that isn't wood: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_International_University_pedestrian_bridge_collapse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_International_Universi...
  - gpderetta 3y ago
    Another famous one: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Ponte_Morandi_collapse https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Ponte_Morandi_collapse

SuperNinKenDo 3y ago

There's nothing in statistics that helps you build a bridge.