What is Digg?52 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+29Old news, I've known lions were cowards since the wizard of oz.
- gharding, on 10/12/2007, -3/+27That was a pretty poor judgement.
- tokyomonster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19This explains why we always want to touch the "Do Not Touch" buttons..
- Enasni1212, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18He shouldn't have tried at all.
- evilTak, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13You should have tried harder.
- noahhoward, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10"oops" ?
- iggiafrica, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Thats why 99% of us suck at poker
- doctechnical, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Faint heart ne'er won fair maiden.
Which is to say there's a difference between *personal* success and *species* success, from the evolutionary point of view. - noahhoward, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Human beings have no natural predators... yes there are things that /could/ eat us but that isn't what being at the top is about.
- CrimsonBlur, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6The title of the story and this submission is a bit inaccurate in my opinion. The way I read it, we're not BAD at judging risk, we just do it differently than some other animals. There are important reasons for this that the article mentions. Given that, how could it really be said we're poor at judging risk? I'd say it's worked pretty well for us so far, considering we are the most intelligent species on the planet and at the top of the food chain.
- covertbadger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@medve001
"If we would react to danger like animals do, there would be no wars. All soldiers would run away at the first sound of enemy fire."
You're suggesting all animals run away when they feel fear. Not true. You try threatening a fiercely territorial animal or a protective mother - see how fast they run. TOWARDS you, with murderous intent. - stonebear, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Not so brave knight. When thou drawest nigh unto thy tournament, thy meek and lowly squire surely attendeth yon maiden faire, though she cast her rose for thee. In this manner bold heart and might of arms cometh to naught, and the meek inherit the earth.
- Ruckgesicht, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Eh, I took a risk.
- TwilightKing, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Funny, I always thought I was pretty good at that game...
- j3one, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Another reason the French are not as highly evolved as they think they are.
- j3one, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3hehe
- CrimsonBlur, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Well the guy was obviously an idiot in the first place, but it doesn't hurt to mention that being drunk severely inhibits your ability to think rationally and totally destroys your judgment in just about everything. Beer Goggles anyone?
- medve001, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4If we would react to danger like animals do, there would be no wars. All soldiers would run away at the first sound of enemy fire.
- drgruney, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@TwilightKing
Yeah... I just beat my friend at Risk this morning. - giddieon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4yes Humans Don't need any natural preditors we kill each other off quite nicely don't we...
- Joe_rigby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yea lol -
But see, even when I'm drunk, sliding down a flaming slide on lighter fluid would seem like a terrible idea. Maybe jello - but lighter fluid? - Pulpx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Is anyone else a little worried about a Wired article trying to explain the psychology of anything? As in most areas of psychology, our understanding of risk is sketchy at best.
- drlog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Exactly. You have to remove the emotion!
- jesuschrysler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1assclown
- Joe_rigby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Does anyone remember seeing the video of the guy getting drunk and going down the flaming slide, after which he had to spend 15 days in a medically induced coma, and close to (allegedly) $250,000 in medical bills with no insurance?
Of course the human brain is a poor judge of risk. - polyGone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think this is something we all should have figured out by now.
http://www.aims.org.au/branches/state_sites/qld/ppts/lfts/img35.jpg - jesuschrysler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1thanks for explaining that
- edm1950, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Sadly for most the answer is yes.
- EBFoxbat, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4See, I'm not a pussy, I'm just smart.
- BabyBrumak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The different approach used to evaluate risk is one of the primary reasons humans can be so dangerous in high risk situations. While many other creatures would immediately run, a human might stay and fight it out. This inherent unpredictability makes it very difficult to judge how people will react. Perhaps this is a major cause of so many conflicts. Rather than backing down or fighting, people misjudge the situation and make a stand where they shouldn't
- ManWithAPlan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@gole
A perfect example is the stock market. I am a finance professional, and deal with behavioral finance. One effect known as the recency effect creates considerable asset mispricings. Investors tend to extrapolate forward recent events. When there hasen't been a market downturn in a while people get complacent. However when stocks drop a little people panick sell because they think that the markets are suddenly very risky. In reality the markets were always somewhat risky, and the people who sell end up the real losers (especially those who write off investing forever because of one bad experience). This is measurable, the average short term trader gets 4% return per year while the market returns 11% per year because they inadequately judge risk. - evilTak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Hah - I meant tried to resist.
- rnwen2750, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Oh, I don't know. I think Jack Bauer might be the top of the food chain. Followed closely by Ethan Hunt. Then, MAYBE, you.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'd say our risk judgment system works pretty well - isn't that why we have alcohol? Granted, I suppose our risk judgment system fails when we ingest it in the first place, but I prefer to think of it as more of a loophole.
- qole, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I agree that the article is bogus. His conclusion doesn't support the first paragraph. He doesn't give any examples of when our risk assessment fails, only examples of when it succeeds.
He mentions a man who feels fear around windows when a storm is blowing, but the risk assessment systems in that man's brain are working fine. His amygdala says, "run away," but his cortex says, "shut up, it's fine" and he doesn't run away.
He then mentions how we have built all sorts of risk-amelioration equipment, like dental floss and 401(k) plans. What's wrong with that? Sounds good.
If I were designing an intelligent creature, I would design a primitive fight-or-flight system, and then I'd design a high-level risk analysis system to sit on top of it and over-rule it when necessary.
I don't see his point at all. He totally failed to convince me. - rnwen2750, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I knew that. Of course, that is AFTER I invested in pogs. D'oh.
- edm1950, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Heyyyy look what I can do. . .
- randf, on 10/12/2007, -7/+7i can't figure out what to do...digg up or runaway
- noisuf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It took an article to realize this?
- mswope, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Ahhh, Bruce Schneier... Still being paid by the word, I see...
- noisuf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0asdf didn't mean to repost
- jhshukla, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1sum and substance of the article:
People are not computers. We don't evaluate security trade-offs mathematically, by examining the relative probabilities of different events. Instead, we have shortcuts, rules of thumb, stereotypes and biases -- generally known as "heuristics." ...
...When you examine the brain heuristics about risk, security and trade-offs, you can find evolutionary reasons for why they exist. And most of them are still very useful. The problem is that they can fail us, especially in the context of a modern society. Our social and technological evolution has vastly outpaced our evolution as a species, and our brains are stuck with heuristics that are better suited to living in primitive and small family groups. - noahhoward, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1You seem to have missed the point.
In any case, humans in general aren't the top of the food chain... I am. - giddieon, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1oops??? man that was funny
- giddieon, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1 "considering we are the most intelligent species on the planet and at the top of the food chain."
Ok lets put you in a cage with a hungry Lion with nothing but your bare hands and we will see who is at the top of the food chain....
Sadly only 1% of the population is the most intelligent species of the humna race.... the rest of us are peons wondering the earth... - phynodedotnet, on 10/12/2007, -12/+4Hi I'm Johnny Knoxville, welcome to Jackass.
- mrwiggles123, on 10/12/2007, -11/+1Explains reverse psychology, and all that other stupid *****
- giddieon, on 10/12/2007, -12/+1This kills me this BS we are not that different from animals we are not as complex as we think or advance... we are more fragile then we think we are not..
Man has always thought as himself complex and sadly will will think ourselves to our doom...
One man said " I am death, Destroy of worlds" what will the next man say... - phynodedotnet, on 10/12/2007, -12/+0Don't digg me down, buttheads. That reference points to the ultimate display of poor judgement. Now you've forced me to spitefully digg down every other comment on the thread on the off-chance I might return the digg to one of you. Happy now?
- Wonkanobi, on 10/12/2007, -20/+1In human brain, judgement risks you! (Sorry, I couldn't resist)
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 