6 ms·

You have good points, but I specifically stated space debris.

• JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > I specifically stated space debris Why is getting killed by space debris is less pleasant than getting killed by a meteorite? The point is there is a background risk of sky-born peril. There is tremendous opportunity in putting things in orbit. Given the frequencies of any damage or injury from extra-atmospheric debris, of our or nature's making, it would be surprising if the marginal benefits gained from optimising for more safety would outweigh the opportunity cost. We should look for cheap optimisiations that reduce the risk of peril. But eliminating the possibility is impossible; pursuing massive reductions in risk absurd.
  • jjav 3y ago
    > Why is getting killed by space debris is less pleasant than getting killed by a meteorite? In terms of liability, we (society) usually make a distinction between nature and events produced by humans. If a hurricane falls a tree and it collapses your house, that's just nature. If someone is cutting that tree and they do it wrong and it collapses your house, you'd hope they are liable.