Explore >> Select a destination
|
You are here 
|
www.fathead-movie.com | ||
| | | | |
www.schneier.com
|
|
| | | | | I've written repeatedly about the difference between perceived and actual risk, and how it explains many seemingly perverse security trade-offs. Here's a Los Angeles Times op-ed that does the same. The author is Daniel Gilbert, psychology professor at Harvard. (I just recently finished his book Stumbling on Happiness, which is not a self-help book but instead about how the brain works. Strongly recommended.) The op-ed is about the public's reaction to the risks of global warming and terrorism, but the points he makes are much more general. He gives four reasons why some risks are perceived to be more or less serious than they actually are:... | |
| | | | |
www.nakedcapitalism.com
|
|
| | | | | Even with concerns about using AI in medicine, proponents contend doctors can properly oversee its use. Is that realistic? | |
| | | | |
abetternhs.net
|
|
| | | | | NB This is a rewritten version of the post. Thanks to those who commented on the first version I have written this because like many, perhaps most GPs I feel very uneasy about power. I aspire to a partnership with my patients, teamwork with my fellow health professionals and a more equal society. I feel... | |
| | | | |
www.juliusruechel.com
|
|
| | | "Bystander at the Switch" is a moral riddle. COVID lockdowns are that dilemma. And universal human rights were invented to stop us pulling the switch. | ||
