Hacker News Reader

Comment by SideburnsOfDoom | Hacker News Reader

It's basic loss aversion https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/loss-psychology.asp

> While probably true in general, there are some cases where it's obviously not true (like the parachute example - if you haven't hit the ground, you're opening your chute too early).

Yeah, it depends on the size of the downside in the risk.

I should nick myself shaving once in a while? Ok, fine.

I should miss a flight once in a while? You must be joking. No way, pal.

A person who travels for business twice a week on the company expense should miss a flight once in a while? Yeah ... ok, that might just work for them.

View on HN

> I should miss a flight once in a while? You must be joking. No way, pal.

If the number of samples is very low then the saying wouldn't apply yet. If you do self-fund a lot of flights then yes way, pal. Wasted unpleasantly-spent time is money too, if there's enough of it.

Let's make it a direct tradeoff. How many extra hours in an airport is worse than missing a flight? I'm sure there's a number for that. I bet the vast majority of people would answer within an order of magnitude of 100 (so between 10 and 1000 hours).

The cost of "missing a flight" varies hugely. In some cases it just means I arrive 3 hours late to a meeting I wasn't that interest in being at in the first place. In other cases it means I miss my connecting flight, have to pay out of pocket for a new flight and a hotel and miss one day of my big holiday that I've been looking forwards to all year.

Well the suggestion wasn't that you cut every flight closely, it's more that you should bring your average down.

For the purpose of the direct trade-off, pick a median flight.

I also guess that people who hold those opinions mostly travel for work, don't pay for their own tickets and have the sort of job where showing up a bit late for meetings once in a while won't get you fired. So for them missing a flight is like me missing a buss.

For most people their 'median' flight is taking them to their special vacation they've been saving up for and planning for years.

Well again "If the number of samples is very low then the saying wouldn't apply yet."

If you'd trade x hundred hours for a missed flight, and cutting that close would have only saved you 15 airport hours in your entire life, then you're doing fine!

> For most people their 'median' flight is taking them to their special vacation they've been saving up for and planning for years.

If you go on at least one flight a year, you can name a number of hours. It'll just be higher than business guy.

If you don't even fly that much, then you're exempt from question.

At the airport I don't merely sit and wait. I catch up on email and paperwork, maybe start watching a movie. It's not wasted time so I don't mind being there 30 mins extra for safety.

Only 30 minutes? I would never cut it that fine.

> Wasted unpleasantly-spent time is money too, if there's enough of it.

Ah, but with access to a good airport lounge, the extra time there is quite pleasantly spent. And YMMV, but for me, time spent stressed about being late for a flight is extremely unpleasantly spent.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com