3 ms·
The analogy was provided to help illustrate the difference between complacency and confusion. You can not substitute driving any vehicle into the analogy uncha
by Veserv 3y ago
The analogy was provided to help illustrate the difference between complacency and confusion.
You can not substitute driving any vehicle into the analogy unchanged because in normal vehicles the overwhelming majority of vehicle operators do not believe the vehicle can be operated safely without attention. Some may do so anyways, but the overwhelming majority of those cases are because they believe they are paying an adequate amount of attention, not because they believe no attention is needed. That is an example of complacency. If they wrongly believe that no attention is needed, then that is confusion.
It is okay if you misunderstood as people who have no experience with safety-critical engineering are usually unfamiliar with the distinction, but you should reflect on it until you understand as it is hard to provide meaningful input to a conversation until you understand the basics. Good luck with your learning.
- tgma 3y agoTha analogy was far off and exaggerated to the point that it was meaningless. At this point you're continuously making up things using phrases like "overwhelming majority". Unless you are able to substiate your claims with something other than your feelings and point to data I don't think continuing this discussion is productive. I'm outta here.