welp. im confused.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
The actual tradeoffs would be interesting to study, but also the psychological perception is interesting. People tend to identify with one value over the other, and seem to have trouble actually evaluating tradeoffs.
End of conversation
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
We adapt to deal with risks in the environment. Adapting to a risk that never presents in the environment is a waste of energy, and therefore is 'less safe.'
End of conversation
-
-
-
Asking people is gonna be weird because a) I think there’s a fish/water scenario where people replete with one don’t think about it and b) we are awash in propaganda
-
right, exactly. I suspect that people are more replete with safety than agency, which is why people say they value agency more. But yea the propaganda really fuzzes it all.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Many take banal safety for granted until it affects them (negatively) This is evident with food/ medications being sold (you will get exactly what you're told is being sold); it wasn't long ago this wasn't guaranteed in the US. Agency/ Safety trade off for buyers and sellers.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It's a spectrum. I'll give up the freedom to drive 200 mph to be safer. Of course, as a white, professional man, I know I'd likely get an exception for, say, speeding my pregnant wife to the hospital. I disapprove of laws that are ripe for selective enforcement.
-
Paraphrasing, "Those who trade freedom for security find they have neither."
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.