SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Ilaine who wrote (78234)10/17/2004 1:11:39 AM
From: D. Long  Read Replies (1) of 793857
 
I agree that the risk is relatively small in general

But that misses the point, again. You can do three sorts of calculations.

One, is a personal calculation. You can analyze your personal probability of being killed by an exploding Coke bottle. The risk is very small, and you don't worry about it.

Two, is an industrial calculation. You know that if you make x number of Coke bottles, y Coke bottles will be defective and explode. After your first taste of what a jury thinks about that, you weigh the costs of the inevitable damages against the costs of mitigating the damages. You've priced the decision.

Third, there's a madman planting exploding bottles in the Coke bottling plant. You don't know the frequency or intensity of the potential mad bottle bomber bombings. You don't sit around justifying not doing anything about the mad bomber because the individual risk per capita is slight. You stop the bomber, period.

Derek
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News