gwern comments on Open thread, July 29-August 4, 2013 - Less Wrong

3 Post author: David_Gerard 29 July 2013 10:26PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (381)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: asr 01 August 2013 04:56:19AM 2 points [-]

I hear you and I'm not trying to play the definition game or wriggle out of this. The way I conceptualized the question -- which I think the original poster had in mind and what I think is relevant to hazard risk assessment -- is more like one of these:

A) "What fraction of the public is seriously vulnerable to sensory hazards",

B) "Given that one knows one's medical history and demographics, what is the probability that there are sensory hazards one is vulnerable to but not already well aware of."

My hunch is that the answers are "less than 20%" and "close to zero." The example of epilepsy didn't shift my beliefs about either; epilepsy is rare and is rarely adult-onset for the non-elderly.

Comment author: gwern 01 August 2013 02:41:20PM 9 points [-]

B) "Given that one knows one's medical history and demographics, what is the probability that there are sensory hazards one is vulnerable to but not already well aware of."

So you're asking, what new medical sensory hazards may be developed in the future.

Well, the example of photosensitive epilepsy, where no trigger is mentioned which could have existed before the 19th century or so, suggests you should be very wary of thinking the risk of new sensory hazards is close to zero. Flash grenades are another visual example of a historically novel sensation which badly damages ordinary people. Infrasound is another plausible candidate for future deliberate or accidental weaponization. And so on...

epilepsy is rare and is rarely adult-onset for the non-elderly.

There, see, you're doing it again! Why would you exclude the elderly? Keep in mind that you yourself should aspire to become elderly one day (after all, consider the most likely alternative...).

Comment author: asr 01 August 2013 07:18:55PM *  3 points [-]

The photosensitive epilepsy and infrasound examples convinced me, thank you. I see that those are cases where a reasonably informed observer might be surprised by the vulnerability.