| ▲ | howunfortunate 4 hours ago | |
I get it, but I think you need a new analogy. Because the car case just has too much empirical evidence that safety features are the way to go for cars. We used to have the equivalent of "spikes" and people still drove a lot, and died, at way higher rates. https://assets.weforum.org/editor/Tmf51HF4UDnSDHD4RxS75s1_5m... | ||
| ▲ | darkwater 5 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | |
> We used to have the equivalent of "spikes" and people still drove a lot, No, we did not. The point of that example is to put a literal spike in the driving wheel, so the driver recognizes a very well known, immediate life-threatening device a few inches from their body. This would act as a deterrent to go fast, because they would be the one certainly dying in basically any case outside smooth driving. | ||
| ▲ | mitthrowaway2 an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | |
This is so far from the point of the analogy. But when you don't normalize by miles driven, the improvements don't look quite as impressive, especially for pedestrians. https://www.iihs.org/research-areas/fatality-statistics/deta... | ||
