These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Relationship between risk aversion and autonomous thoughts and actions.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Fuee
Doomheim
#21 - 2012-02-09 13:13:32 UTC
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
Fuee wrote:
Look at me responding to these questions. I blame myself.


Fixed.


Did I hurt your feelings mr.

Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:

High Sec

Depends on WHICH city I'm in. Anywhere in Texas.....wait (they WILL fine you).

San Francisco, walk when clear.


You colossal ******
Cebraio
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
#22 - 2012-02-09 13:15:34 UTC
TheBlueMonkey wrote:

go to CVA space, get on their good side and it's a very non-comital 0.0 lifestyle.

Yes, I thought about that.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#23 - 2012-02-09 13:20:56 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
1 both
2 Just walk (we dont have silly US laws)

^^ Same.

OP: Your hypothesis is deeply flawed in that it assumes walk/don't walk is in any way “permissive” in nature, when that's simply not true on the general scale needed for your investigation to work. In quite a few countries, jaywalking is not illegal or otherwise “not permitted” — the lights for pedestrians are merely there to assign liability: if you cross the street at a red light, you're liable for any accidents that might happen and will trigger any number of other offences; If nothing happens (or nothing has a chance of happening) then you did nothing wrong.

For your idea to work, you have to select a population sample where your notion of “permissive” lights holds true.
BellaDonna Nyghtshade
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#24 - 2012-02-09 13:24:31 UTC
Tippia wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
1 both
2 Just walk (we dont have silly US laws)

^^ Same.

OP: Your hypothesis is deeply flawed in that it assumes walk/don't walk is in any way “permissive” in nature, when that's simply not true on the general scale needed for your investigation to work. In quite a few countries, jaywalking is not illegal or otherwise “not permitted” — the lights for pedestrians are merely there to assign liability: if you cross the street at a red light, you're liable for any accidents that might happen and will trigger any number of other offences; If nothing happens (or nothing has a chance of happening) then you did nothing wrong.

For your idea to work, you have to select a population sample where your notion of “permissive” lights holds true.


What you say is indeed true, and has been taken into account. The responses make that easy enough within a given margin of error.

Also, this is hardly "scientific". It is a social exercise. Curiously accurate, as well.
St Mio
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#25 - 2012-02-09 13:25:18 UTC
What kind of road is this? How many lanes? What time of day is it? What kind of area does the road reside in? Are there islands in the middle? How far can you see to tell if any cars are coming? Are there any obscured driveways? Is it well lit? How is the weather, is visibility poor due to fog?
BellaDonna Nyghtshade
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2012-02-09 13:28:32 UTC
St Mio wrote:
What kind of road is this? How many lanes? What time of day is it? What kind of area does the road reside in? Are there islands in the middle? How far can you see to tell if any cars are coming? Are there any obscured driveways? Is it well lit? How is the weather, is visibility poor due to fog?


This is the second time I have noticed a complete lack of comprehension of the written English Language on your part.

What is your native tongue, so that I may show to be as fail at it as you are at mine..................
Tallianna Avenkarde
Pyre of Gods
#27 - 2012-02-09 13:30:03 UTC
1. Low/Null
2. Go when it's safe to cross, regardless of little flashing men

And a sudden plunge in the sullen swell. Ten fathoms deep on the road to hell.
Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises
Otherworld Empire
#28 - 2012-02-09 13:32:59 UTC
1. Top-sec
2. Walk

★★★ Secure 3rd party service ★★★

Visit my in-game channel 'Holy Veldspar'

Twitter @ChribbaVeldspar
Alissa Solette
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2012-02-09 13:33:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Alissa Solette
1.) 0.0

2.) Walk when it's safe (the traffic lights are only required when there is heavy traffic)
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#30 - 2012-02-09 13:33:34 UTC
EVE: Hisec
IRL: No traffic, there I go.
Cebraio
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
#31 - 2012-02-09 13:37:43 UTC
Tippia wrote:

For your idea to work, you have to select a population sample where your notion of “permissive” lights holds true.

Also people handle red lights differently. I.e. in Italy a red light is more a recommendation to stop than it is an order. And crossing a street in Rome can be dangerous regardless of the traffic lights. There will be many more countries where it is handled loosely by the people regardless of possible fines.

Me and my colleagues only wait if there is police nearby, or little children. (Nice comparison isn't it?)
malaire
#32 - 2012-02-09 13:44:07 UTC  |  Edited by: malaire
1) highsec
2) wait

But as for me there is no correlation because of "risk aversion". In RL I wait because I want to follow the rules, not because I want to avoid risk. Also what risk would there be if there is no traffic going on as you said?

So I believe this RL example to be badly chosen for your study.

EDIT:

Also, if there is no light for pedestrians, i.e. it is legal to cross, I can cross even if I see car coming - but I estimate that I can cross safely before it gets near.

And in game I have made hauling trips in lowsec in my mammoth, which many says is risky. But I never got ganked.

So I do not stay away from calculated risk when I consider risk to be small enough.

ps. I have trouble IRL with multiple choice questionaries. I remember this one time when I was required to fill one and ended up writing comments to paper explaining about how badly chosen the options were - and the person who was meant to analyze my results said something about how he can't analyze it because I didn't stick to just answering the questions ......

New to EVE? Don't forget to read: The Manual * The Wiki * The Career Options * and everything else
St Mio
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#33 - 2012-02-09 13:45:36 UTC
BellaDonna Nyghtshade wrote:
St Mio wrote:
What kind of road is this? How many lanes? What time of day is it? What kind of area does the road reside in? Are there islands in the middle? How far can you see to tell if any cars are coming? Are there any obscured driveways? Is it well lit? How is the weather, is visibility poor due to fog?


This is the second time I have noticed a complete lack of comprehension of the written English Language on your part.

What is your native tongue, so that I may show to be as fail at it as you are at mine..................

Beef, usually Smile
Orion Guardian
#34 - 2012-02-09 13:56:36 UTC
null
**** the red light I walk
BellaDonna Nyghtshade
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#35 - 2012-02-09 14:04:12 UTC
Cebraio wrote:
Tippia wrote:

For your idea to work, you have to select a population sample where your notion of “permissive” lights holds true.

Also people handle red lights differently. I.e. in Italy a red light is more a recommendation to stop than it is an order. And crossing a street in Rome can be dangerous regardless of the traffic lights. There will be many more countries where it is handled loosely by the people regardless of possible fines.

Me and my colleagues only wait if there is police nearby, or little children. (Nice comparison isn't it?)


Following a rule, even when it makes no sense as there is no danger, *IS* risk avoidance.

It could even be said that conformity in general is risk avoidance.
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#36 - 2012-02-09 14:04:32 UTC
Fuee wrote:
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
Fuee wrote:
Look at me responding to these questions. I blame myself.


Fixed.


Did I hurt your feelings mr.

Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:

High Sec

Depends on WHICH city I'm in. Anywhere in Texas.....wait (they WILL fine you).

San Francisco, walk when clear.


You colossal ******



Shocked huh ????

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Valei Khurelem
#37 - 2012-02-09 14:18:28 UTC
1. I live wherever I damn well want to be at the time I have a main in high sec and an alt. in 0.0

2. I ignore the signal and walk when I see the road is clear or safe to cross

"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP."   - CCP Ytterbium
Serene Repose
#38 - 2012-02-09 14:28:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Serene Repose
If you're at a crosswalk, and that light is blinking DON'T WALK, and you do walk...but, a policeman happens to SEE you, you're going to get a ticket, unless the cop is in an unusually good mood. WHY? It's against the LAW to disregard pedestrian traffic devices just like it's against the LAW to disregard automobile traffic devices.

So, if you really are so far into your education that you'd be trying to write a research paper, then you'd have to be astute enough on the most elementary level to understand you pose two sets of circumstances that are so divergent from one another that no information you might derive from responses to one could possibly inform upon the other.

One can readily assume (risk aversion in the title will out) you're trying to make a comparison between the two instances as though they're examples of "playing it safe." If you play hi sec, you're playing it safe. If you don't rush across the intersection against the traffic, ipso facto.

a. Obeying the law and being safe from being hit by a car don't reflect the same psychological motivation.

b. As playing in hi sec could have to do as much with how lucrative the specific system is, and the nature of the systems its related to, playing in hi sec doesn't in and of itself reflect "playing it safe."

That being said. I play in hi sec, and obey the laws of my community.

If you are, as you say, interested in autonomous behavior and risk aversion, you might consider looking into things such as the blink reflex, or the gag reflex. Autonomic, as the word says, characterizes a reaction one cannot (without great effort) inhibit by exercise of free will. Should something, for instance, fly up suddenly in your face, your reaction is to blink to protect your eyes. Should you swallow something "evil" the gag reflex is there to protect your gastro-intestinal system. There are quite a few more.

Judging by how wrong the tree is that you're barking up I'd say you either have a thin understanding of the nature of your subject...so thin you'd require more basic education on it to be in a position to research it...OR, you're just trolling in an effort to create the impression that playing in hi sec is a reaction to some sort of psychological infirmity.

I tend to guess the latter. Thanks for playing.

We must accommodate the idiocracy.
OmniBeton
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#39 - 2012-02-09 14:41:52 UTC
Hi sec




Walk, but first look around if there is no police looking at me.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#40 - 2012-02-09 14:46:54 UTC
Serene Repose wrote:
If you're at a crosswalk, and that light is blinking DON'T WALK, and you do walk...but, a policeman happens to SEE you, you're going to get a ticket, unless the cop is in an unusually good mood. WHY? It's against the LAW to disregard pedestrian traffic devices just like it's against the LAW to disregard automobile traffic devices.
See, this is the kind of generalisation that makes the OP's hypothesis deeply flawed. What you said is not true.

It's against the law in some places and under certain circumstances to disregard traffic devices.

Quote:
That being said. I play in hi sec, and obey the laws of my community.
So you're a highsec ganker? Blink