Yeah, I understood what you were saying. I don’t get the downvotes you’re getting. I was just adding that it’s a sad reflection of reality that those two people play the same role. Goes to show how fucked up the right wing has gotten.

I don’t agree with everything you just said but we vibin’

“killing black people isn’t murder like killing rats with pesticide isn’t murder” -the least racist conservative

Greta Thurnberg a young woman appalled by politicians watching the world burn and doing nothing, unwilling to make even the smallest sacrifice for future generations.

Kyle Rittenhouse racist proud boy who murdered black [lives matter supporters] people for fun and profit.

Yeah, I can see how they fit the bold young activist figurehead role for each side, but the juxtaposition REALLY highlights how disgusting right wing politics are.

[Edit]

Ah yes climate doomerism. “The Earth is going to become uninhabitable, but there’s nothing anyone can do about it now so I’ll just keep on keeping on”. Classic!

First Incidents per hour is not arbitrary. These numbers compare very well to daily activities such as walking, driving, bathing, eating, swimming so that non specialists have a good idea of how much risk an activity carries by comparing it to an activity they’re familiar with.

Secondly ISO 26262 produces ASILs as its output which are qualitative, but still based on probably assessments in terms of chance of incidence per hour. The reason for qualitative instead of quantitative assessments of the more general SILs (based on IEC61508, the parent of ISO 26262) is that qualitative is cheaper than quantitative and the automotive industry is full of corner cutting.

Third, aircraft use QUANTITATIVE risk assessments based on ARP476, so risk can be directly measured and mathematicaly compared to any other activity. When people say “flying is safer than driving” it’s not arbitrary, it’s based on real math. The same math the FAA is using to find safety issues in the Boeing production line.

Fourth

I’m certainly not saying that safety isn’t important or that we can’t assess it.

Is this you?

safety isn’t a thing we can measure.

One accident per million hours is a direct measurement of safety, not “completely arbitrary”. The idea that the threshold in aviation regulations are “arbitrary” because it’s not based on a physical law or constant is like saying the temperature we use as “too hot for prolonged contact” is arbitrary. If you exceed it you’re likely to get burned, and if you exceed the safety thresholds in aviation regulations you’ll be less safe in an airplane than other types of transportation that we as a society find acceptable.

In engineering safety is not “just a feeling”.

Your arguments are so absurd I’m certain you’re just trolling for a reaction with brain dead comments like this.

Usually in North America bidet refers to a modified insert or toilet seat that includes a sprayer and a lever to control. It doesn’t take up any space at all. Definitely a stand alone bidet takes up a lot of space but they’re visually non existent in North America, although I certainly would prefer that to the sprayers.

“safety isn’t a thing we can measure” says a guy who knows nothing about measuring risk and assumes it means no one in the world does either.