Hacker News Reader

But we accept risk because of benefits a car moving faster than 0 brings. I might say same about some of psychedelic drugs. At least from my personal experience.

Not true.

You might be stopped in your car in the parking space but someone else might just crash into your car.

So just being in the car on a public road or parking will be safer than driving but not safe as in zero chances of being involved in an accident.

The same goes with alcohol even if you dont consume you are not completely safe from its effects: someone might drink and drive or drink and operate a machinery or drink and build your house …

Probably the same can be said about tiredness or something else. We should pick our battles. I am not sure which ones are better. Just found it funny that even sitting in the car is not safe enough as long as we have vehicles

Not sure how that’s a rebuttal, the scenario you described is a danger because the speed of the other car is not zero. It’s telling that the only scenario you found to make it dangerous was to bring another moving car into the equation.

Except in an intersection or on a highway

I don't think that takes away from their point

It means you accept some risk if you get some utility. You can justify anything with a zero risk policy.