We can delay heart disease, cancer, and strokes, but not prevent the deaths. Those 1e6 numbers aren’t moving very far.
I assume you’re calculating the tail risk of terrorism based on backtesting, and ignoring the fact that preventing terrorism is a disproportionately high priority of the governments of the world. The extent and scope of measures taken cannot be ignored when talking about the impact.
Yes global warming has tail risk; it doesn’t show up in this analysis because it isn’t causing deaths, but I think the level of coverage is pretty high considering the low death toll.
Similarly nuclear war - especially during the Cold War, thermonuclear weapons had killed fewer people than falling pianos, yet for some reason was very high on people’s mind.
I assume you’re calculating the tail risk of terrorism based on backtesting, and ignoring the fact that preventing terrorism is a disproportionately high priority of the governments of the world. The extent and scope of measures taken cannot be ignored when talking about the impact.
Yes global warming has tail risk; it doesn’t show up in this analysis because it isn’t causing deaths, but I think the level of coverage is pretty high considering the low death toll.
Similarly nuclear war - especially during the Cold War, thermonuclear weapons had killed fewer people than falling pianos, yet for some reason was very high on people’s mind.