[brokenpromise]

I hope you haven't driven since 2012 as well because that's orders of magnitude more dangerous. For any single flight, the probability of dying is vanishingly small.

Statistics are your friend.

[gambiting]

No, they aren't. It feels vastly different knowing that if there is an accident while flying you are almost guaranteed to die, while a road accident is almost guaranteed not to kill you.

[mattnewport]

That's a common misconception but survival rates for plane crashes are actually higher than most people think: https://boingboing.net/2012/11/05/surviving-a-plane-crash-is...

[quuquuquu]

On United 232, 111 people died.

An additional 47 were seriously injured.

The remaining 120+ people had "minor injuries", which, because the plane erupted into flames, I assume had to do with smoke inhalation.

This can't seriously be considered a good outcome. The PTSD of nearly dying in a fire would personally be too much for me. Again, that is my bias.

Also, are hijackings being considered here? They are common enough, terrorist or not.

It would be cheeky to say that a hijacking is not an accident and therefore isn't included in the stats.

[brokenpromise]

That's not how risk works, though. The probability of dying from a gunshot to the head are basically 1, but the probability of that event happening is basically 0. So it wouldn't make sense to never go outside because getting shot in the head is almost certain death; the risk that matters is of the event itself happening, not the outcome given that the event has already occurred.

[quuquuquu]

It wouldn't make sense to never go outside, that is correct.

It would make sense, however, to avoid high crime areas, large and violent gatherings of people like riots, etc.

And if you were truly, truly, truly paranoid, you could wear a kevlar helmet around. People might think you are a complete freak, but war journalists do it.

My point here is, when I'm driving a car, I can control my personal risk.

With flying, most of the risk factors are completely out of my hands. I can only control the number of times I fly. And if they were legal, I could wear a parachute.

[brokenpromise]

> My point here is, when I'm driving a car, I can control my personal risk.

Yeah, if you never looked at the evidence or psychology then I suppose you would come to that conclusion.

> With flying, most of the risk factors are completely out of my hands.

Why do you think flying is so much safer than driving?

[quuquuquu]

Re: your first point, how can you say I have not looked at evidence or psychology?

The aggregate statistics for road deaths and injuries include drunk drivers, high speed two way roads in Wyoming, winter collisions, etc.

I don't drive drunk. I don't drive on high speed two way roads. I don't live in a wintery place.

The aggregate statistics do not represent my driving habits. I am controlling my risk.

Re your second point, yes flying is safe. I don't dispute it. However, people /still die/ while flying. Ok, now why is that?

Planes are hijacked. Engines fail. Planes collide. Planes are shot down.

I can't control the situation once it occurs. I can only choose to not fly.

When I'm driving, I can choose my type of car. I can drive defensively. I can avoid certain roads.

You might think this is just an illusion of control, but how many people have died in a 25 mph crash in a very safe truck on side roads?

How many people have died on two lane roads at night with alcohol involved?

[gambiting]

I know that HN is a very specific crowd, but humans are not machines - just because I know flying is safer than driving does not make me feel any better about it. Same reason why I feel very unsafe when I'm a passanger in a car vs. driving myself - I feel in control of the situation, even though statistically it's not a safe situation to be in at all.