4 ms·
That's reassuring for those who died.
by KingOfCoders 3y ago
That's reassuring for those who died.
- _3u10 3y agoHuman's don't accurately measure risk, and society doesn't allocate resources according to minimizing deaths in the cheapest way possible. Lots of people die, likely many more due to shoddy work on the drive to / from the airport. As a society we could probably save far more lives with far less cost by say changing tire grippiness standards / mandating people get their tires inspected. The Boeing stuff is just for the most part moral grandstanding. Everyone drives around all day every day in cars that are far less safe than a 737-MAX without worrying about "reassuring those who died". Worse yet, we let people ride bicycles to work which are far more dangerous than cars.
- aaomidi 3y agoOkay the problem is that there is a competitor to Boeing that’s seriously better than Boeing in its track record recently.
- _3u10 3y agoTurbulence is the #1 cause of accidents on flights, what makes airbus planes better in turbulence? As I said before people are extremely bad at modeling risk. How much longer of a life span would a person have if they flew only airbus vs only Boeing? My guess. The exact same.
- hypothesis 3y ago“Well, some of them are built so the front doesn’t fall off at all.” How good are people at evaluating risk of e.g. “conspiracy to defraud the Federal Aviation Administration”? https://www.justice.gov/criminal/criminal-fraud/case/united-states-v-boeing-company https://www.justice.gov/criminal/criminal-fraud/case/united-...
- aaomidi 3y agoWell when the bolts are setup tighter, the plane doesn’t unravel itself.