Sentences with phrase «probability bad outcomes»

A mindful perspective tells us we can worry about low probability bad outcomes, but such worries are mostly just a waste of time.

Mindfulness helps us realize that even this low probability bad outcome does not necessarily equate to a financial disaster.

Not exact matches

However, many people tend to match their response proportions to the outcome probabilities — they bet on the better slot machine in 67 percent of the cases, and on the worse one in 33 percent of the cases.)

As journalist Louis Menand put it, «The experts performed worse than they would have if they had simply assigned an equal probability to all three outcomes... Human beings who spend their lives studying the state of the world, in other words, are poorer forecasters than dart - throwing monkeys.»

On whole, though, it seems clear that «first to worst» is a pretty low probability outcome and «first to kinda regrettable» isn't hugely more likely.

On a high level, many people define risk as «the worst possible outcome weighted for the probability of the occurrence of that outcome.»

Taking the probability of these events occurring, it applies that probability to your retirement to tell you the outcome of your finances, whether good or bad.

And it likely will make the dog worse, not better, and so an ill advised judge could be setting up a situation where the solution increases the probability that the dog and owner will re-offend, and the outcomes will be even worse.

Even assuming we are assigning probabilities correctly (very dubious in itself), the usual use of probabilities of outcomes in things like cost - benefit analysis assumes an aggregation of harms across many, many similar decisions, in some of which cases things turn out very badly, but in others of which things come out not so badly.

The longer we keep pulling the trigger in exchange for cash, the greater the probability that we're in for a really, really bad outcome, even if we can't predict exactly when it will happen, the size of the bullet, or the exact place it will hit us (first).

They echo discussions following the losses of two space shuttles, the Gulf of Mexico oil gusher and many other realms where low - probability, worst - case outcomes, or unknown unknowns, can up - end the greatest engineering achievements at great cost in lives or wealth.

The prognosis could be catastrophic, but we can not assign a firm probability to the worst outcomes, and we are not even sure what the most likely outcome is.

Wagner and Weitzman helpfully translate the scientific research on climate sensitivities into probabilities of very bad outcomes, and they conclude that at 700 ppm, there is an 11 percent chance of an increase in global temperature exceeding 11 degrees Fahrenheit.

The reasons for that are many: the timid language of scientific probabilities, which the climatologist James Hansen once called «scientific reticence» in a paper chastising scientists for editing their own observations so conscientiously that they failed to communicate how dire the threat really was; the fact that the country is dominated by a group of technocrats who believe any problem can be solved and an opposing culture that doesn't even see warming as a problem worth addressing; the way that climate denialism has made scientists even more cautious in offering speculative warnings; the simple speed of change and, also, its slowness, such that we are only seeing effects now of warming from decades past; our uncertainty about uncertainty, which the climate writer Naomi Oreskes in particular has suggested stops us from preparing as though anything worse than a median outcome were even possible; the way we assume climate change will hit hardest elsewhere, not everywhere; the smallness (two degrees) and largeness (1.8 trillion tons) and abstractness (400 parts per million) of the numbers; the discomfort of considering a problem that is very difficult, if not impossible, to solve; the altogether incomprehensible scale of that problem, which amounts to the prospect of our own annihilation; simple fear.

If we judge only by outcomes, decisions will be made to pursue the lowest probability of a bad outcome.