Schneier: We Need To Relearn How To Accept Risk 478
An anonymous reader writes "Bruce Schneier has written an article about how our society is becoming increasingly averse to risk as we invent ways to reduce it. 'Risk tolerance is both cultural and dependent on the environment around us. As we have advanced technologically as a society, we have reduced many of the risks that have been with us for millennia. Fatal childhood diseases are things of the past, many adult diseases are curable, accidents are rarer and more survivable, buildings collapse less often, death by violence has declined considerably, and so on. All over the world — among the wealthier of us who live in peaceful Western countries — our lives have become safer.' This has led us to overestimate both the level of risk from unlikely events and also our ability to curtail it. Thus, trillions of dollars are spent and vital liberties are lost in misguided efforts to make us safer. 'We need to relearn how to recognize the trade-offs that come from risk management, especially risk from our fellow human beings. We need to relearn how to accept risk, and even embrace it, as essential to human progress and our free society. The more we expect technology to protect us from people in the same way it protects us from nature, the more we will sacrifice the very values of our society in futile attempts to achieve this security.'"
Re:please, please (Score:3, Funny)
I'd rather not. It's not like we can stop Flo from selling insurance or anything.
Re:Diminishing returns (Score:0, Funny)
The only thing stopping the richest from protecting themselves by exterminating everyone else is the shitty quality of the robots.
And the fact that the poorer people ultimately control what the richest people can and cannot do through politics. As long as the very rich are a tiny minority, they will always be at the mercy of the majority, that can 'democratically' decide to steal their wealth and do with it whatever they please.
Re:Sorry, but where is the evidence? (Score:2, Funny)
Yes, based on that UID he must be at LEAST 7 years old which is clearly old enough to understand complex civil issues. (I joined about 8 years ago and have a lower UID by 200,000, so I know 7 years is approximately correct -- yet, you have no idea how old I am nor how old aaaaaaargh! is relative to my age, either).
Re:Diminishing returns (Score:5, Funny)
I said, "Don't do it!" He said, "Nobody loves me." I said, "God loves you. Do you believe in God?" He said, "Yes."
I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?" He said, "A Christian."
I said, "Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?" He said, "Protestant."
I said, "Me, too! What franchise?" He said, "Baptist."
I said, "Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?" He said, "Northern Baptist."
I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist."
I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region."
I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912."
I said, "Die, heretic!" And I pushed him over.
- Emo Philips