It’s difficult to get people to support something that reduces total deaths but directly causes some deaths that wouldn’t have occurred otherwise. An example is the vaccine. Covid kills many people, but the idea of a vaccine killing one person who might have otherwise been fine (if she never got vaccinated) is unacceptable to us.
Yes, vaccines are definitely a trolley problem. While it’s not as clear cut, implementing an AI driving program could also be seen this way… except people are even less likely to accept the intervention because the current situation gives us control over our driving.
Second, hilariously I meant “butt heads” but it got autocorrected to “butt beads” but I suppose that works too.
Third, love all the World Cup stuff. I remember that so clearly, but you’re totally right. It’s not even that big of a deal. It just FELT like one.
Over the past two days I’ve had an email exchange with someone who won’t engage with the complex questions I asked (about something she specifically invited pushback on) but instead says I’m discounting her lived experience. But, from that standpoint, any questions or suggestion that maybe one’s perception of an experience could be seen differently is just violence or whatever. Unlike all those “accidents.”
I feel more bullish on nuclear being a tool to fight climate change than self-driving cars but I think redirecting the environmentalism boat is going to be painful. At the very least, it will take some people(not kids), willing to be the heel, who know how to pick and win important fights.
The fear of nuclear power has a legit cause, which is the potential permanent ruination of large swaths of land. For example, I live 100 miles from a working nuclear power plant that sits on an earthquake fault that is now believed to be much more active than was believed when the plant was built. I am not at all happy about this. I believe that my unhappiness is perfectly reasonable.
If Indian Point melts down and takes out New York City, we might be pretty unhappy about it, above and beyond the mere death count.
Re self-driving cars, there are potential black swans here. Likely the cars will all have to be networked into a communications grid, which could be subject to catastrophic failure.
It’s difficult to get people to support something that reduces total deaths but directly causes some deaths that wouldn’t have occurred otherwise. An example is the vaccine. Covid kills many people, but the idea of a vaccine killing one person who might have otherwise been fine (if she never got vaccinated) is unacceptable to us.
I think you may have just pushed this into the land of the trolley problem, which I'm embarrassed to admit I find an exciting turn of events.
Yes, vaccines are definitely a trolley problem. While it’s not as clear cut, implementing an AI driving program could also be seen this way… except people are even less likely to accept the intervention because the current situation gives us control over our driving.
First, I’m humbled and honored.
Second, hilariously I meant “butt heads” but it got autocorrected to “butt beads” but I suppose that works too.
Third, love all the World Cup stuff. I remember that so clearly, but you’re totally right. It’s not even that big of a deal. It just FELT like one.
Over the past two days I’ve had an email exchange with someone who won’t engage with the complex questions I asked (about something she specifically invited pushback on) but instead says I’m discounting her lived experience. But, from that standpoint, any questions or suggestion that maybe one’s perception of an experience could be seen differently is just violence or whatever. Unlike all those “accidents.”
Another winner; well said.
I feel more bullish on nuclear being a tool to fight climate change than self-driving cars but I think redirecting the environmentalism boat is going to be painful. At the very least, it will take some people(not kids), willing to be the heel, who know how to pick and win important fights.
The fear of nuclear power has a legit cause, which is the potential permanent ruination of large swaths of land. For example, I live 100 miles from a working nuclear power plant that sits on an earthquake fault that is now believed to be much more active than was believed when the plant was built. I am not at all happy about this. I believe that my unhappiness is perfectly reasonable.
If Indian Point melts down and takes out New York City, we might be pretty unhappy about it, above and beyond the mere death count.
Re self-driving cars, there are potential black swans here. Likely the cars will all have to be networked into a communications grid, which could be subject to catastrophic failure.
Finally on footnote 7: I'm shocked. A Nobel Laureate in physics went to prison for 2 years in a similar situation 15 years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Robert_Schrieffer
After a meltdown? Absolutely not.
Hey, why don't you go take an extended vacation in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone? It's perfectly safe there, right?
Enjoy your vacation! Send a postcard!