←back to thread

The Conquest of Hell Gate [pdf]

(www.nan.usace.army.mil)
47 points sklargh | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.211s | source
Show context
ddulaney ◴[] No.44022006[source]
It’s fascinating to me what a different view of risk we had in the past.

The no damage being caused on the surface was a “new fact”. That would never fly today, for better or for worse.

replies(1): >>44022307 #
Aloha ◴[] No.44022307[source]
I think one of the problems of modern society is the level of risk people deem acceptable - its now near zero, instead of "reasonable risks".

Aside from that, culturally the value we impart on a single human life has also changed too - death used to be much more common, infant death in particular - its not uncommon to go to an old cemetery and see a single family having buried three or more children, with another 2-3 having survived to adulthood. This was not something limited to the lower classes either, Calvin Coolidge had a son who died of sepsis from a blister while he was president.

replies(3): >>44022546 #>>44022798 #>>44024188 #
ndileas ◴[] No.44022798[source]
Are you implying that was, somehow, good? Because it was bad. Most major religions / ethical paradigms agree on this.

People, individually, should take risks if that's what they want, and it's not going to hurt others. I'm totally fine with skydiving, base jumping, rock climbing, whatever. I'm not fine with pumping chemicals into the local water table because that's the way Grandpa do.

replies(2): >>44022890 #>>44023584 #
1. Aloha ◴[] No.44022890[source]
The biggest issue I have, is we allow large organizations to make decisions on difuse/abstract risks - often without owning the liability from those choices, but roll many liabilities up for an individual choice to an organization - its perverse, and should be the other way around.

If I do something that earns me a darwin award at work, my company probably should not be liable for it.