Hi Tom, On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:43 AM, Tomas L. Byrnes <[email protected]> wrote: > Ignoring risk is a perfectly valid way of managing it, if the return of > putting the resources into the risky endeavor exceed the costs of > putting them into managing the risk. I know its common practice, but I respectfully disagree. Its been my experience that most problems can be solved correctly from an engineering standpoint. Risk acceptance (or ignoring risk) is often used as a way to justify the sale or use of a defective product or service.
Waiting or hoping for corporations to do the right thing is futile for most corporations. Asking folks like you and I to use a defective product because management wants to persue profits is a pervision. All the more reason we (consumers and users) need strong liability and merchanibility laws; and corporate boards should be held personably liable for the negligence. > It's probably hard wired into our psyche. Not all of the people all of the time ;) Jeff > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Rob, grandpa of Ryan, Trevor, Devon & Hannah > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 3:03 PM > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: [funsec] More bad news for risk management > > Overconfidence make you successful in business. > > http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2188148/Sir-Alan-Sugar-ef > fect- > Overconfidence-make-successful-workplace.html > > Not just confidence, mind you, *over*confidence. > > Add in the Dunning-Kruger effect: > http://www.spring.org.uk/2012/06/the-dunning-kruger-effect-why-the- > incompetent-dont-know-theyre-incompetent.php > > ... and the Peter Principle: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle > > ... and you start to realize why all those huge banks keep failing ... > _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
