I would argue it’s more like neglecting fat tails. One doesn’t manage risk by looking at the most probable outcome but by looking at how high the systemic costs of the error might be. People in power suck at that. Obviously.
-
-
-
I suspect the problem might be that once a society evades tangible existential risk, the leadership establishes itself based on social criteria. (Same happens to corporations and institutions.)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
That's a far leap. And probably not true, depending on what dataset you are using to define "usually".
-
In a more narrower context- when your expectations are worsened with reliable new information, safe to say previous information was general understood to imbue better than probable expectations. Doesn’t have the same ring to it. Maybe less wrong but is the concept communicated?
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.