7,166 karma · joined November 2, 2016
Seveneves had a conclusion, and then an extra book...
Two out of a large administration, from a cohort especially prone to cancer diagnosis:
- Older (the baseline incidence rate for cancer in people over 60 is 1%)
- Selected for skepticism towards medical advice and guidelines
- Access to world-class health screening
Other things one might care about:
- Ergonomics: weight, balance, shape of the neck & body, finishes all affect the feel of playing the guitar
- Build quality: Reliability, stability of the wood, ease of setup
- Durability: Quality of finishes, quality of assembly
- Aesthetics
It's much harder to block a military column from advancing down a 200' wide boulevard than down a 20'-alley.
Plus, going for a walk/run in the stroller with Dad has to be developmentally healthier than staring at a tablet on the couch.
TFA mentions Hannah Arendt in the introduction and discusses the holocaust (if briefly, because most of its focus is on more modern regimes.
In this case, I knew the rough dates of all but one of the events in the list; adding years in a timeline would have given the last away.
If people were drinking raw milk directly out of the udder, in a clean environment and blessed with a baby cow's immune system and microbiome, that would be pertinent, but they aren't. Even human breast milk extracted in a clean environment with sanitized tools gets risky very quickly when stored.
FWIW, in this instance Adam Back is also a non-secret billionaire, mostly from his public involvement in a number of ventures within the Bitcoin ecosystem. The difference is closer to 1 order of magnitude than the 4 you're proposing.
Every safety measure faces a question of whether the resources allocated to it are an efficient means of achieving that reduction in risk.
To GP's point, we probably can't prevent people from crashing altogether, but we currently have a road system designed to sacrifice safety on the altar of throughput [0]. How many more or fewer kids (or just people) would die if governments allocated the resources to making roads safer that they currently mandate their citizens use on car seats?
> I don't need a guard on my table saw if I don't stick my thumb in it. Don't need a helmet if I don't fall off of my bike.
Do you think the guard on your table saw makes you safer than training and experience using the saw safely? There are always limited resources and multiple routes to safety, so we shouldn't assume any given safety measure is the best use of those resources (especially in consideration of second-order effects).
[0] https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018-3-1-whats-a-stroad-...
[0] Hint: As our sibling conversation shows, that's a non-trivial question.
- the enemy had plenty of material, technical and financial support from adversarial superpowers who were all too happy to see American lives, money and military resources wasted.
That external support is not fully scaled up yet (despite clear reports of Russian intelligence support for Iran), but you can bet it would be in the event of a major ground assault, occupation, and/or counter-insurgency quagmire.