3 ms·
Does the existence of a seat-belt suppress the "natural heightened attention" (whatever this is) of the driver? > There isn't any risk for someone giving their
by gnulinux996 2y ago
Does the existence of a seat-belt suppress the "natural heightened attention" (whatever this is) of the driver?
> There isn't any risk for someone giving their money to a badly-managed corporation, so they do it without thinking
I have no insight to the institutions I give my money to; if they operate on American soil, I "understand" that they have been regulated and brought up to standard by the State.
The fact that a consumer depositing their money in the bank has to do "due diligence" or needs to be blamed when the institution (company?) goes belly up is laughable.
- roenxi 2y ago> Does the existence of a seat-belt suppress the "natural heightened attention" (whatever this is) of the driver? No. If there is a crash the driver will still be involved in the crash. Seatbelts are a risk-reduction technique, FDIC is risk transfer. > I have no insight to the institutions I give my money to... The good news is you're pretty normal. However the observation is you're enabling a bunch of rather untrustworthy people who don't care about your interests and it is pretty easy to imagine that story ending worse than if you were in a position where you either demanded some insight or didn't give them money.
- smarm52 2y agoGreat response, thank you. > Does the existence of a seat-belt suppress the "natural heightened attention" (whatever this is) of the driver? I love this analogy. It neatly highlights that an individual, no matter how "attentive" can still be acted on by external forces. And also, implies that said individual is always affected by those around them, because they share their environment with others. I find that same have difficult grasping these points, at times.