3 ms·

Yeah, I think this actually may explain things better than specificity. Even if the false alarm rate is low, the rate of actual, life-threatening fires is incre

by x1798DE 12y ago

Yeah, I think this actually may explain things better than specificity. Even if the false alarm rate is low, the rate of actual, life-threatening fires is incredibly low in modern day, so chances are almost every time you hear a fire alarm go off it's alerting you essentially erroneously. I get the impression that in a home the "standard procedure" for dealing with fire alarms is to open windows, fan the smoke away from the thing and/or take the batteries out of the alarm.

dllthomas 12y ago
It depends. The rate of smoke alarms going off inadvertently while someone is cooking is high compared to the actual incidence of fires. The rate of smoke alarms going of when no one is doing anything heat-related is clearly lower. If you are a person who just burned some toast, that is almost certainly the reason the smoke alarm is going off, and it's entirely reasonable to address the symptoms. If you are a person who woke up to a smoke alarm, and no one else was cooking anything, things are a little different.
- x1798DE 12y ago
  I don't know if I've ever experienced personal (home) fire alarms going off for no reason, and I've never had them go off because of an actual fire, but I have had them go off when someone else is cooking (alerting me that someone is cooking, whether or not I knew that), or due to steam from a shower, if they are placed wrong - again, whether or not I knew someone was taking a shower. In corporate/organizational environments - often in buildings made entirely of concrete - I've had them go off very frequently, but almost never as a result of a dangerous condition - usually either a drill, a small fire that was immediately put out, someone pulling the fire alarm as a prank/protest or something else like someone burning popcorn or something. I still think the point stands.
  - dllthomas 12y ago
    Which point? My point was that in a (nonadversarial) context where you have known triggers for false alarms, P(problem|alarm) falls dramatically once you have identified the presence of such a trigger, and it's entirely reasonable for our actions to reflect this.

by x1798DE 12y ago

dllthomas 12y ago

It depends. The rate of smoke alarms going off inadvertently while someone is cooking is high compared to the actual incidence of fires. The rate of smoke alarms going of when no one is doing anything heat-related is clearly lower. If you are a person who just burned some toast, that is almost certainly the reason the smoke alarm is going off, and it's entirely reasonable to address the symptoms. If you are a person who woke up to a smoke alarm, and no one else was cooking anything, things are a little different.

x1798DE 12y ago
I don't know if I've ever experienced personal (home) fire alarms going off for no reason, and I've never had them go off because of an actual fire, but I have had them go off when someone else is cooking (alerting me that someone is cooking, whether or not I knew that), or due to steam from a shower, if they are placed wrong - again, whether or not I knew someone was taking a shower. In corporate/organizational environments - often in buildings made entirely of concrete - I've had them go off very frequently, but almost never as a result of a dangerous condition - usually either a drill, a small fire that was immediately put out, someone pulling the fire alarm as a prank/protest or something else like someone burning popcorn or something. I still think the point stands.
- dllthomas 12y ago
  Which point? My point was that in a (nonadversarial) context where you have known triggers for false alarms, P(problem|alarm) falls dramatically once you have identified the presence of such a trigger, and it's entirely reasonable for our actions to reflect this.