Nov 25, 2002, 5:02 AM
Post #3 of 6
(1313 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PhreeZone] Interesting paper on risk association and open container fatilities
[In reply to]
Can't Post
I am amazed that there has been only one commentary in 7 days! I found it excellent, very interesting and would like to know if there has been a follow-up. I mean, did the author keep on working on the subject? Keep us, the only two people that seem interested on the subject posted!
cpoxon (D 11665)
Moderator
Nov 25, 2002, 5:44 AM
Post #4 of 6
(1297 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PhreeZone] Interesting paper on risk association and open container fatilities
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Actually it's open canopy fatalities. :-P Okay, so the container has to be open for the canopy to be open but when I saw the title I thought it was going to be a pull-out vs. throw-out argument and put off reading it. Going to read it now...
billvon (D 16479)
Moderator
Nov 25, 2002, 10:23 AM
Post #5 of 6
(1257 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PhreeZone] Interesting paper on risk association and open container fatilities
[In reply to]
Can't Post
The concept of risk homeostatis isn't a new one, although I think there is a lot more to it than that. Had canopy technology not changed at the same time that cypreses had become available, I would agree with the author. However, given that new canopies are simply less forgiving of error than older canopies, I think that effect is going to predominate.
Nov 26, 2002, 4:40 AM
Post #6 of 6
(1189 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Interesting paper on risk association and open container fatilities
[In reply to]
Can't Post
"The concept of risk homeostasis isn't a new one, although I think there is a lot more to it than that. Had canopy technology not changed at the same time that cypreses had become available, I would agree with the author. However, given that new canopies are simply less forgiving of error than older canopies, I think that effect is going to predominate."
OK, Billvon but when you buy a new canopy you do it knowing that it has increased performance and that it is less forgiving. You buy it because of it's increased performance and accepting the increased risk. To me it is not an independent variable. It fits perfectly well within the risk homeostasis theory. It's really very interesting. I'd love to know the follow-up if there is one.
