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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (7676)12/20/2005 3:08:51 PM
From: neolib  Respond to of 543184
 
Automobile crashes do not seem to me to fall under the same umbrella.

You seem focused on human intent as the sole source of risk. From 9/11 on, far more people have died prematurely from natural risks (disaster, sickness) then have from direct human causes. A rational risk assessment would direct more of our $ towards those issues, even thought they are not directly human caused.



To: one_less who wrote (7676)12/20/2005 3:09:02 PM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 543184
 
So when one party positions itself as a threat to another party an assessment for the risk of harm should be considered

Indeed, a risk assessment is called for. But risk assessment is about estimating the gravity of the risk. You don't address how you would do that without using body count.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News