Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why you've never been in a plane crash

asteriskmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 310 posts

Re: Why you've never been in a plane crash

#221

Post by nayuki »

npteljes wrote: post #215
ylhert wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cognitive dissonance people have around this issue is astonishing. We are willing to ground the 737MAX fleet when a few people get a (surely terrifying) open air flying experience; but 44,000 people are killed on the road in the US _every_ year (and rising!) and very few people seem to care. In most age cohorts, death by car is the largest killer. In the US you have a 1 in 107 chance of dying in a car crash in yo…

I too have thought a lot about this cognitive dissonance. I think that there are several differences to the two issues, and so, in people's attitude towards it too. One, I think, is that flying is something that is being done to us, and driving is something that we do ourselves. So the agency, the point of view is very different. Something bad happening while being passive is much more horrifying because of the power…

> is that flying is something that is being done to us, and driving is something that we do ourselves. So the agency, the point of view is very different.

Correct. An all-too-popular viewpoint is, "I'm a good driver, unlike everybody else on the road!".

> if everyone took the train, the bus, or a ship, and similar things would happen to a train, bus or ship, the freakout would be similar to what we see now with planes

I believe this is the case already. A train or bus kills a few hundred a year, it makes national news for a week. Don't get me wrong, it's a tragedy and needs to be fixed. But then, those 44k car-related deaths are continually brushed aside.

Re: Why you've never been in a plane crash

#222

Post by josephg »

krisoft wrote: post #157
josephg wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are several ways we could write a list of best practices. But the simplest would be to simply attach a financial cost to leaking any personal data to the open internet. This is essentially how every other industry already works: If my building falls down, the company which made it is financially liable. If I get sick from food poisoning, I can sue the companies responsible for giving me that food. And so on. We…

> If I get sick from food poisoning, I can sue the companies responsible for giving me that food. Except that is not how food safety is achieved. There are strict rules about how food must be stored, prepared. How the facilities must be cleaned and how the personal must be trained. If these are not met inspectors can and will shut a commercial operation down even if nobody got sick. And if they follow all best practi…

> Except that is not how food safety is achieved.

Food safety is achieved via a combination of strict rules (equivalent of best practices) and liability in case of harm. There's been plenty of quite famous court cases over the years stemming from bad food being sold leading to people getting sick and dying.

Re: Why you've never been in a plane crash

#223

Post by Orangeair »

josephcsible wrote: post #220
Orangeair wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen hundreds of posts on that sub, but never anything approaching what you're describing. Do you have an example?

The vandals in question call themselves "Tyre Extinguishers". Search for that phrase in that subreddit, and you'll see it's full of people defending them.

Just looked into this, so there is actually a growing movement of people doing that, interesting.

Re: Why you've never been in a plane crash

#224

Post by nayuki »

rpmisms wrote: post #204
nayuki wrote: post #199

Great article. I agree a lot with the safety culture in commercial aviation and the commitment to investigate and fix root causes. Now can we please apply the same standards to car crashes? The same human errors and bad infrastructure keep getting repeated over and over again. And the problems are getting worse, with SUVs and distracted driving on the rise. See https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/ for a community that…

r/fuckcars has members who deflate and slash car tires that belong to vehicles they deem "too big". Do you support that methodology?

The driving majority has members who support buying tall heavy SUVs and pickup trucks "for their family's safety", running over pedestrians, speeding wherever they please, and protesting any kind of traffic calming or enforcement. And then there are the teens who run over cyclists for fun, such as in the case of Andreas Probst. Do you support that methodology?

Re: Why you've never been in a plane crash

#225

Post by pyinstallwoes »

ylhert wrote: post #209
nayuki wrote: post #199

Great article. I agree a lot with the safety culture in commercial aviation and the commitment to investigate and fix root causes. Now can we please apply the same standards to car crashes? The same human errors and bad infrastructure keep getting repeated over and over again. And the problems are getting worse, with SUVs and distracted driving on the rise. See https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/ for a community that…

The cognitive dissonance people have around this issue is astonishing. We are willing to ground the 737MAX fleet when a few people get a (surely terrifying) open air flying experience; but 44,000 people are killed on the road in the US _every_ year (and rising!) and very few people seem to care. In most age cohorts, death by car is the largest killer. In the US you have a 1 in 107 chance of dying in a car crash in yo…

But how many crashes are from the same model and from engineering vs pilot error?

Re: Why you've never been in a plane crash

#226

Post by IggleSniggle »

nayuki wrote: post #221
npteljes wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I too have thought a lot about this cognitive dissonance. I think that there are several differences to the two issues, and so, in people's attitude towards it too. One, I think, is that flying is something that is being done to us, and driving is something that we do ourselves. So the agency, the point of view is very different. Something bad happening while being passive is much more horrifying because of the power…

> is that flying is something that is being done to us, and driving is something that we do ourselves. So the agency, the point of view is very different. Correct. An all-too-popular viewpoint is, "I'm a good driver, unlike everybody else on the road!". > if everyone took the train, the bus, or a ship, and similar things would happen to a train, bus or ship, the freakout would be similar to what we see now with plane…

Even if you know you aren't a good driver, you would still carry around the idea that it was your own fault for not being a better driver. Its really the level of personal agency involved (and the sense of that agency being taken away) that causes the brushing aside.

Re: Why you've never been in a plane crash

#227

Post by DiggyJohnson »

mewse-hn wrote: post #179
tialaramex wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SOLAS (Safety Of Life At Sea) an international convention (ie International Law agreed by most countries) is indeed in big part a result of Titanic. SOLAS covers a lot of safety improvements and has continued to improve over time especially after a later version of the treaty makes updates "tacitly accepted" basically instead of signing treaties periodically the members agree that they're all automatically bound by a…

But, even though you would very rarely need them, likely never for a vessel which operates close to shore, they must be maintained periodically because SOLAS, and maintenance of lifeboats is pretty dangerous because they're on the outside of a ship. So you may end up killing or seriously injuring more people by having lifeboats. Did the designers of the Titanic write this? You're arguing having enough lifeboats for a…

If more people are killed by installing and maintaining lifeboats than are saved, then why wouldn't it be reasonable to disagree strongly with the status quo on life boats?

They didn't argue that the maintenance is bad because its expensive. How could you miss that point? You literally quoted it in your comment:

> > ... dangerous ...

Re: Why you've never been in a plane crash

#228

Post by scoofy »

nayuki wrote: post #221
npteljes wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I too have thought a lot about this cognitive dissonance. I think that there are several differences to the two issues, and so, in people's attitude towards it too. One, I think, is that flying is something that is being done to us, and driving is something that we do ourselves. So the agency, the point of view is very different. Something bad happening while being passive is much more horrifying because of the power…

> is that flying is something that is being done to us, and driving is something that we do ourselves. So the agency, the point of view is very different. Correct. An all-too-popular viewpoint is, "I'm a good driver, unlike everybody else on the road!". > if everyone took the train, the bus, or a ship, and similar things would happen to a train, bus or ship, the freakout would be similar to what we see now with plane…

The illusion of control. Most humans are instinctual predisposed to it, and it generally has to be unlearned. It's why blackjack is much more popular than roulette in a casino, even though there is much more room to play blackjack sub-optimally, but effectively zero chance of playing roulette in a way that hurts your chances of winning.

Re: Why you've never been in a plane crash

#229

Post by bostonpete »

chmod600 wrote: post #211
nayuki wrote: post #199

Great article. I agree a lot with the safety culture in commercial aviation and the commitment to investigate and fix root causes. Now can we please apply the same standards to car crashes? The same human errors and bad infrastructure keep getting repeated over and over again. And the problems are getting worse, with SUVs and distracted driving on the rise. See https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/ for a community that…

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_... TIL that car fatalities were declining until 2019, and then reversed and are getting worse. What happened in the last five years? Safety features of the cars themselves are improving (emergency braking). Alcohol may be a factor, but why in the last five years? Cars have been big for a while. WFH probably reduced commuting time. Other countries appear to…

> TIL that car fatalities were declining until 2019, and then reversed and are getting worse.

Per your link, fatalities per mile drive bottomed out in 2014 and barely dropped after 2010. There's been some speculation that this reversal in safety was tied to the rise of smartphones and a corresponding increase of distracted driving.

Post reply on HN