News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

Risk Aversion

Started by Max Rockatansky, June 07, 2022, 12:53:43 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Max Rockatansky

How risk averse are you?  Personally I don't think that I am really all that risk of adverse.  I tend to participate in a lot of activities recreationally that some (mainly family) would find questionable.  Some of the more frequent that come to mind off my personal list that I've heard concern about from family or friends:

-  Hiking and/or camping alone in remote places.
-  Running most mornings well before sunrise.
-  Driving on one-lane and/or remote roads. 
-  Travel to cities domestically with high instances of crime on the Uniform Crime Report or have State Department travel advisories. 

When I was younger I was much more into things like riding ATVs and participating in OHV activities than I am now.  The topic of travel to Detroit in particular for urban exploration came up in the Illinois is Flat 2.0 thread on page 20 and 21:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=30421.msg2744207;boardseen#new

To an extent, I tend to find a lot of experiences with a degree of risk to be far more thrilling than those without.  I think this is mostly evident when I go hiking on some sort of really difficult trail or even when I drive a thrilling roadway. 


kphoger

Most people don't know how to handle large numbers, or they're too lazy to bother even looking at the numbers.  Therefore, most people think a lot of safe things are actually risky.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

JayhawkCO

I've traveled to many developing countries by myself. I climb the highest mountains in the continental US. I hold my six month old without him wearing a diaper. I'd like to think I'm pretty risk averse.

webny99

I enjoy traveling, so I'm definitely not one to avoid going somewhere out of fear, but at the same time, I've never been interested in activities like roller coasters, zip lining, etc., so I suppose it depends what level of risk we're talking about.


Quote from: Max Rockatansky on June 07, 2022, 12:53:43 PM
-  Hiking and/or camping alone in remote places.
-  Running most mornings well before sunrise.
-  Driving on one-lane and/or remote roads. 
-  Travel to cities domestically with high instances of crime on the Uniform Crime Report or have State Department travel advisories. 

I don't think any of those things are risky, questionable, or out of the ordinary at face value.

CtrlAltDel

Quote from: kphoger on June 07, 2022, 01:03:28 PM
Most people don't know how to handle large numbers, or they're too lazy to bother even looking at the numbers.  Therefore, most people think a lot of safe things are actually risky.

And they think that a lot of risky things are actually safe. It usually boils down to familiarity.
Interstates clinched: 4, 57, 275 (IN-KY-OH), 465 (IN), 640 (TN), 985
State Interstates clinched: I-26 (TN), I-75 (GA), I-75 (KY), I-75 (TN), I-81 (WV), I-95 (NH)

Max Rockatansky

#5
Quote from: webny99 on June 07, 2022, 01:14:15 PM
I enjoy traveling, so I'm definitely not one to avoid going somewhere out of fear, but at the same time, I've never been interested in activities like roller coasters, zip lining, etc., so I suppose it depends what level of risk we're talking about.


Quote from: Max Rockatansky on June 07, 2022, 12:53:43 PM
-  Hiking and/or camping alone in remote places.
-  Running most mornings well before sunrise.
-  Driving on one-lane and/or remote roads. 
-  Travel to cities domestically with high instances of crime on the Uniform Crime Report or have State Department travel advisories. 

I don't think any of those things are risky, questionable, or out of the ordinary at face value.

Right, but a lot of people have a perception that they do.  In particular when I worked on the road 100-150 nights a year many family members voiced concerns that I was doing something inherently unsafe because I was alone.

Also, somehow there is a perception that running in the dark is more risky than the daytime.  I've never been hit by a car at 5-6 AM but I've been hit twice during the 2-3 PM hour.

Quote from: CtrlAltDel on June 07, 2022, 01:31:50 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 07, 2022, 01:03:28 PM
Most people don't know how to handle large numbers, or they're too lazy to bother even looking at the numbers.  Therefore, most people think a lot of safe things are actually risky.

And they think that a lot of risky things are actually safe. It usually boils down to familiarity.

Familiarity is something I personally generally find mundane and boring.  Speaking for myself I'm comfortable with trying unfamiliar things, I don't think that's true for a lot of people.

NWI_Irish96

When it comes to potential harm in nature (falling, encountering poisonous snakes, bears, etc) I'm extremely risk averse.

When it comes to potential harm from other people (riding the Green Line to Oak Park at 1am) I'm much less risk averse. We got a great deal on our house because we were willing to live within two blocks of the state line, which is viewed by people in other parts of town as high risk but really isn't.
Indiana: counties 100%, highways 100%
Illinois: counties 100%, highways 61%
Michigan: counties 100%, highways 56%
Wisconsin: counties 86%, highways 23%

J N Winkler

People assign different weights to the possibilities of gain and loss associated with each activity.  For example, I'm not bothered by backcountry camping (which I've done in Denali National Park) or urban exploration in high-crime areas (East St. Louis in my case), but I tend to steer clear of high-impact exercise because I assign a higher value to avoiding the need for surgical repair of joints than most people.  That, in turn, is informed by my vicarious experience of friends of my parents' generation who have undergone unsuccessful knee replacements and other medical interventions that led to cascades of additional care rather than clear cures.

This also dovetails with identity.  A person who prides himself or herself on good impulse control and not doing things without first thinking them through may come off as risk-averse at first glance, when in fact he or she has very high risk tolerance in certain contexts.
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

kphoger

WARNING:  I dug this out from the annals of the Coronavirus thread (may it rest in peace), back toward the beginning of lockdowns.  I think we all understand that some of our thoughts and opinions have changed a little, or a lot, over the last two years.  I do NOT want this to become another Coronavirus thread, and I don't suppose anyone else does either.

OK, now that I've gotten that out of the way...  I think this post pretty well summarizes my take on risk.

Quote from: kphoger on May 01, 2020, 10:51:33 AM
Perhaps, then, there is a fundamental difference between the way you and I live our lives.

Staying safe is not the goal of my life.  Heck, staying alive isn't even the goal of my life.  I fully expect to die at some point in my life.  That doesn't mean I live recklessly, but it does mean that "is it safe?" isn't the guiding question that controls my decisions.

In 2008, my wife and I decided to take steps towards doing mission work in Mexico.  A couple of months later, escalating cartel violence started making US headlines, and everybody we knew told is it wasn't safe to go to Mexico.  The first year we went (March 2009), my wife's own mother called her "stupid" for taking our one-year-old son to Mexico.  Her grandparents told us that, with any future trips, we shouldn't even tell them we were going until we got back to the USA.  Even today, the US Department of State says of the state we travel to:  "Reconsider Travel ... due to crime.  Violent crime and unpredictable gang activity are common..."  For the first several years, I did research about the safety of travel there.  I obtained detailed data from the Mexican attorney-general's office, downloaded Harvard mathematician-published research papers, looked through FBI crime statistics, made charts and graphs based on my findings, etc.  But all of that was really for the sake of others traveling with us.  It wasn't for our own sake.  We had a call on our lives to serve in Mexico, and it's our belief that one is supposed to follow his or her calling whether it's safe or not.  (I'm trying to avoid overtly religious language.)  Our best friends recently moved to the town we serve in, with our full encouragement and support.  "Is it safe?" is a question that factors into their decisions and ours, but it is far from the most important factor.

When we do go to Mexico, we often do roof demolition.  We destroy the very surface we stand on, sometimes swinging mattocks while balancing on the edge of the wall because there's nowhere else to stand.  Is it safe?  Maybe, maybe not.  After the work is done, we take the children down the street to the swimming hole.  The water isn't treated, people dump all sorts of stuff into the canal that flows through it, my friend has even seen a turd floating by.  Is it safe?  Maybe, maybe not.  But we decide to do these things anyway, because they are acts of ministry to the children there.

2 million drivers in the USA suffer permanent injury or disability because of car accidents in any given year.  I personally see or hear car crashes every year, and major wrecks on the highway frequently affect my commute.  But this does not keep me from driving a car.  Is driving safe?  Maybe, maybe not.

More than half a million Americans die from heart disease every year.  I have borderline cholesterol, and heart attacks run in the family.  But these things do not define how I choose what to eat.  I buy high-oleic sunflower oil for cooking applications I used to use lard for, for example, but I'm not about to switch to a raw diet.  Could I be healthier if I became religious about my diet?  Certainly.  But extending my life as long as possible isn't my goal.

If I drop food on the floor, I pick it up and eat it.  Might I get sick from that?  I suppose so.

Back when I didn't have a car, I used to hitchhike.  One week-end, I took Greyhound from Chicago to Menominee (MI), then hitchhiked for two days across and down through Michigan and back to Chicago.  Just for fun, because I wanted to see Michigan.  Was it safe?  Well, who knows? because there are almost no statistics on the safety of hitchhiking.

"Safety" is an illusion anyway.  What will you be looking for?  100% safety?  It doesn't exist.  There are always canaries, if you look hard enough.  When the government does tell us it's "safe", what will that mean anyway?  No risk of infection?  That we can go to the store with zero risk of catching any illness?  That's an impossibility.  We live our lives with a combination of myriad factors, each of which lies somewhere along a continuum of risk.  Focusing on that continuum will leave a person paralyzed, because it's impossible to eliminate all the risk factors.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

hbelkins

I would consider myself to be very risk-averse, but that extends more to life decisions than recreational activities.

I'd never give up the security of a safe job with an established employer to join a startup. (My wife had a co-worker who did that years ago and the startup failed. She tried to talk my wife into joining her, but she wisely declined.)

Until I acquired what are known as "reversion rights," I would never have considered taking a non-merit (politically appointed) position in state government. Now, if I take a political appointment, I'm guaranteed to be able to go back to a job similar in pay and duties to the one I'd give up to take the appointment if I get dismissed from the non-merit position.

Even now I'm eligible for what's known as "resign/reinstate," which means I can resign my job today and be rehired tomorrow into the same job, but at an increased salary. However, that starts a probationary period, the same as if I was a brand-new hire, and with the political climate in Kentucky being what it is, there's no way I would risk that.

I'm not a risk taker. I'll settle for the bird in my hand over what's out there in the bush anytime.


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

Max Rockatansky

Much earlier in my career I found advancement was much easier if I was willing to move or switch jobs every three-four years.  A lot of that was calculated risk but realistically it was abated largely by then shitty benefits packages and a lack of pensions.  About a decade ago I ended up taking a government job in my field.  Aside from moving around by choice there hasn't been much reason to rock the boat now that I'm lining up for a 20 year pension.  I do want to transfer overseas at year 17-18 so there is some sort of guarantee on where I return to State side. 

All the same, even early in my career I got into moderate-high risk investing.  Really the hardest thing about that is just having to the nerve to keep my money invested when a recession hit.  That was particularly dramatic during early game COVID but it paid off well during the inevitable economic rebound.

webny99

Quote from: kphoger on June 07, 2022, 02:25:06 PM
WARNING:  I dug this out from the annals of the Coronavirus thread (may it rest in peace), back toward the beginning of lockdowns.  I think we all understand that some of our thoughts and opinions have changed a little, or a lot, over the last two years.  I do NOT want this to become another Coronavirus thread, and I don't suppose anyone else does either.

I don't want this to become a covid thread either - it's shaping up to be plenty interesting without that.

However, speaking of risk-aversion... I will note that I had covid recently, and when I did, I considered starting a thread titled "is the covid-19 pandemic 'over'?" or something similar. I thought it would be an interesting topic and hopefully one that everyone's nerves are much calmer about 2.5 years later, but I still had hesitations about it, which is why I haven't done it yet.

kphoger

Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

Rothman

Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Max Rockatansky

I wasn't ready to jump to conclusions about COVID, but a lot of people were when the news from Wuhan was breaking.  Either way, if the disease was as bad as that early suggestion of a 4% mortality I still wouldn't be okay hunkering down in my home for an indefinite period of time.  I rather meet my end on some trail or mountain road than the safety of my home.

I think the way I would sum up COVID is that the unknown scares easily but the known does not.

Rothman

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on June 07, 2022, 03:49:33 PM
I wasn't ready to jump to conclusions about COVID, but a lot of people were when the news from Wuhan was breaking.  Either way, if the disease was as bad as that early suggestion of a 4% mortality I still wouldn't be okay hunkering down in my home for an indefinite period of time.  I rather meet my end on some trail or mountain road than the safety of my home.

I think the way I would sum up COVID is that the unknown scares easily but the known does not.

I thought we didn't want to turn this into a COVID thread.  This is how you turn it into a COVID thread.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

webny99

Quote from: kphoger on June 07, 2022, 03:46:06 PM
Yeah, let's not.
Quote from: Rothman on June 07, 2022, 03:47:31 PM
Depends.

I was thinking of it more as an opportunity to share experiences with covid, since what, probably 50%? of the population has had covid at this point, and it seems to be continually getting less severe over time. I've been sick much worse with other cold/flu in the past.

Rothman

#17
Quote from: webny99 on June 07, 2022, 03:56:25 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 07, 2022, 03:46:06 PM
Yeah, let's not.
Quote from: Rothman on June 07, 2022, 03:47:31 PM
Depends.

I was thinking of it more as an opportunity to share experiences with covid, since what, probably 50%? of the population has had covid at this point, and it seems to be continually getting less severe over time. I've been sick much worse with other cold/flu in the past.
Fine, COVID thread.

Fun what vaccines and masks can do.

Only 85 million cases in the U.S., so nowhere close to 50%.

And yet over a million have died from it.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

kphoger

Here's an interesting example of how people fail to handle large numbers:

I know someone at church who used to be in charge of QC for a company that made a/c units.  Professionally, he was used to interpreting numbers in context–say, was an issue that had arisen with their customers a total of 126 times nationwide one that needed to be addressed, or was 126 a small enough number to be acceptable?  Should all potentially affected customers be sent a notice, or would that cause more harm than good?  Et cetera?

Anyway, at a church missions committee meeting, I was explaining to him where in Mexico we do mission work in, where we drive across the border, and such.  In response to my description of the driving route, he then said something like "based on what's happening in the area, I assume"–as in cartel violence.  He then mentioned a former work associate who lives in Monterrey, who refuses to drive out of town because of the violence.

This is someone who obviously knows how to handle large numbers.  But he apparently isn't in this case.

Let's take for an example the highway between Monterrey and Nuevo Laredo.  5½ million vehicles drive that highway every year.  Even if there were a cartel incident on that highway every six months, that would still mean the chance of the victim being you is just under 1 in 3 million–approximately the same as being struck by lightning in the USA during a given year.

Or take for another example, the intersection of Kellogg and Rock Road here in Wichita.  That intersection sees about 50 car crashes every year–call it one wreck per week.  And yet I'm fairly certain this man doesn't avoid that intersection when he's on my side of town.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

kphoger

Quote from: webny99 on June 07, 2022, 03:56:25 PM
probably 50%? of the population has had covid at this point

Quote from: Rothman on June 07, 2022, 04:00:13 PM
Only 85 million cases in the U.S., so nowhere close to 50%.

Recorded cases, OK.  But that's not the same thing.

Antibodies have been detected in more than 60% of Americans, including 75% of children.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7117e3.htm?s_cid=mm7117e3_w
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

Rothman

#20
Quote from: kphoger on June 07, 2022, 04:05:13 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 07, 2022, 03:56:25 PM
probably 50%? of the population has had covid at this point

Quote from: Rothman on June 07, 2022, 04:00:13 PM
Only 85 million cases in the U.S., so nowhere close to 50%.

Recorded cases, OK.  But that's not the same thing.

Antibodies have been detected in more than 60% of Americans, including 75% of children.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7117e3.htm?s_cid=mm7117e3_w
That's an overstatement of the paper's method.  They derived those percentages from samples, rather than direct detection.

The single paper is also more up front with their methods' limitations.

Also look at the conclusion:

"These findings illustrate a high infection rate for the Omicron variant, especially among children. Seropositivity for anti-N antibodies should not be interpreted as protection from future infection. Vaccination remains the safest strategy for preventing complications from SARS-CoV-2 infection, including hospitalization among children and adults. COVID-19 vaccination following infection provides additional protection against severe disease and hospitalization. Staying up to date with vaccination is recommended for all eligible persons, including those with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection."
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

index

#21
I thoroughly check hotel rooms for bedbugs before I settle in. I did this with the last hotel I was in and got them anyway...I found out when I saw one sucking blood from my partner's face while he was sleeping. That only made me a little bit nauseous. I can't always win I guess.

Luckily they didn't spread to my house because of the precautions I took, but I need to get my car treated. I'm getting that done by the skin of my teeth because right after that I have a pre-hiring appointment I need to go to.

Here's something I do that *wasn't* risk-averse:

I used to give homeless tweekers in Asheville free food when I was feeling particularly depressed. I stopped after a night when one spilled a milkshake and chili all over the inside of my car. In that same night, another came up to me with a massive knife in his hand, but he literally wanted to fist bump me. I obliged him, then he just walked off. I had another one come up to me clearly methed out like hell, desperately asking me for candy. I gave her two icebreakers and she just ran away. Tweekers are a strange breed. That night was too weird for me, so that spelt the end of my charitable giving.
I love my 2010 Ford Explorer.



Counties traveled

kphoger

Quote from: index on June 07, 2022, 04:08:19 PM
... bedbugs ... I did this with the last hotel I was in and got them anyway...I found out when I saw one sucking blood from my partner's face while he was sleeping.

Oh, gosh...

Quote from: index on June 07, 2022, 04:08:19 PM
I used to give homeless tweekers in Asheville free food when I was feeling particularly depressed. I stopped after a night when one spilled a milkshake and chili all over the inside of my car. In that same night, another came up to me with a massive knife in his hand, but he literally wanted to fist bump me. I obliged him, then he just walked off. I had another one come up to me clearly methed out like hell, desperately asking me for candy. I gave her two icebreakers and she just ran away. Tweekers are a strange breed. That night was too weird for me, so that spelt the end of my charitable giving.

I usually grab the food and then drive back over to hand it to them instead.

Also, does anyone else get tweaker and twerker mixed up sometimes?
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

webny99

Quote from: Rothman on June 07, 2022, 04:06:56 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 07, 2022, 04:05:13 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 07, 2022, 03:56:25 PM
probably 50%? of the population has had covid at this point

Quote from: Rothman on June 07, 2022, 04:00:13 PM
Only 85 million cases in the U.S., so nowhere close to 50%.

Recorded cases, OK.  But that's not the same thing.

Antibodies have been detected in more than 60% of Americans, including 75% of children.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7117e3.htm?s_cid=mm7117e3_w
That's an overstatement of the paper's method.  They derived those percentages from samples, rather than direct detection.

The single paper is also more up front with their methods' limitations.

Also look at the conclusion:

"These findings illustrate a high infection rate for the Omicron variant, especially among children. Seropositivity for anti-N antibodies should not be interpreted as protection from future infection. Vaccination remains the safest strategy for preventing complications from SARS-CoV-2 infection, including hospitalization among children and adults. COVID-19 vaccination following infection provides additional protection against severe disease and hospitalization. Staying up to date with vaccination is recommended for all eligible persons, including those with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection."

Still, all of that makes me more certain 50% of the population has had it at some point since early 2020. Given my symptoms, I'm certain many people have had it and not known it, especially in the past ~year as infections have become milder. (FWIW, I have had the vaccine and first booster, and I certainly wouldn't have thought it was covid if I hadn't taken a test, and the only reason I took a test then was because of a known exposure.) Also, it started with a sore throat, so if you've had a sore throat in the past ~year that wasn't strep, chances are very high that it was covid. And even then, my understanding is it wouldn't be recorded unless you self-report... which I doubt many people do anymore.

kphoger

Plenty of people have known they had it but never got tested.  I know multiple such people.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.