Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You used that trigger word, it probably is what's getting you downvoted even though you are correct.

As always, it comes down to the risk of X vs the risk of not doing X. And history has clearly shown we made the right choice.



How do you make that calculation when there is a small possibility of infinite risk? That is why the PP exists, otherwise you either ignore the possibility of total disaster events, or you cannot choose to act.


And nature doesn't have infinite risk events?!

We are reasonably confident that no likely gamma ray bursters are pointed at us and within lethal range. We know dinosaur killers are out there--a failure to map every such object in the solar system is a small probability of an infinite risk. Why are there no ICBMs fitted for point defense against a city killer asteroid? You have the rocket, you have the boom. You need a seeker that can guide it to impact (there are other radars that could illuminate, it just needs to home on the reflection) and a standoff fuse that will fire it at the last possible millisecond.


What is your point? That we should put more effort into protecting against asteroids? I'm sure you could make a convincing case for that.


The problem is we should be focusing on risk, not whether any given risk comes from man or nature.


Which trigger word are you referring to?


Covid.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: