Being "prepared for black swans" is a bad idea. Of course, you want your system as a whole to be as antifragile as possible, but one should never prepare for black swans, but rather buy insurance (so to speak): hedge, diversify, minimize impact. For example, we can imagine a world where some other pandemic is being spread. One that, instead of attacking the lungs, attacks the kidneys. All of a sudden we'd need dialysis machines -- not ventilators. See how preparing for some specific black swan is misguided (as we can be hit by any other, equally unlikely, black swan event)?

> In testimony before a Congressional Committee, it has been asserted that a prolonged collapse of this nation’s electrical grid—through starvation, disease, and societal collapse—could result in the death of up to 90% of the American population.

Okay, this sounds like an interesting assertion. Can we back this up? Is this just alarmism? Where's the data?

> Yes, $300 million dollars for a stockpile of 30 HV transformers is far too expensive to prevent 90% of the public dying and the rest reduced to cannibalism.

I see. So now we're assuming some off-the-charts assertion, which is dubious at best[1], is absolutely true. The cannibalism is thrown in for extra flair. Gotta' get them clicks somehow.

> Update: I forget to mention that I’m far more worried about accidental nuclear war, bioterrorism and AI run amok than I am about solar flares.

Anyone that's seriously worried about "AI run amok" (whatever that means) doesn't understand the first thing about AI.

[1] https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a25883/nor...