iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Replies

Alessandro Rigolon @alerigolon.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

Counting traffic deaths per mile driven is like counting deaths per cigarette smoked

By emphasizing the number of people killed per mile rather than deaths per capita, traffic safety groups risk normalizing the factors that make American roads so deadly.

541214337 1.2K

northernrednekk.bsky.social @northernrednekk.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

They used bid construction jobs on how many deaths per million man hours. Sounds like some governments have to start understanding that personal freedoms do not include taking the lives of others.

020 2

Susan Staniszewski @susanestaniszewski.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

"per mile" is still an important stat. It shows where the most dangerous roads are located, ie I-20 that runs through the south.

001 1

Ezlifelin @ezlifelin.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

I do not understand this. More than 40k+ people die per year due to drivers. If even a few thousand died each year in plane crashes, we would ground everything til we figured something out. But drivers normalize and accept the carnage they cause, not just the 40k deaths but destroyed families. WTF?

010 1

TheLesserOfTwoWeevils @uncommonman1941.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

And why do you think this data is being generated by a corrupt statistical methodology? It it was me, I'd ask who benefits and I keep coming up with the insurance business

010 1

SteveH @sghendricks.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

374 7

Ponyhome @ponyhome.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

Deaths per capita is still misleading, as it does not factor in how car ownership in the USA is almost mandatory. Only in the largest cities is it possible to live comfortably without owning a car. In many other countries car ownership is much less common. It's as if smoking were a job requirement.

000 0

Abby D. @abbykbhomesleak.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

I'll bet insurance companies know how to do it.

040 4

Andrew Weston @groatbury.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

Wrongly

000 0

Chris 📎 @dalekchap.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

Interesting and concerning.

001 1

Wee Dave @weedave.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

Measuring deaths per mile means we could improve safety by making people take the most inefficient route to work. I'd like to see an actual comparison of accidents among drivers who drive less than 10000 miles per year rather than including drivers who drive hundreds of miles daily on safe freeways.

011 1

Skatingfool @michaelbruceschaub.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

I disagree. Deaths per passenger mile is a measure of risk over exposure, an important normalizer when comparing disparate regions. Also, the cigarette analogy is stupid. Go smoke a tailpipe.

000 0

abby77.bsky.social @abby77.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

It depends on individual driver’s & faults of infrastructure. US could build the safe public transportation infrastructure for everyone, but auto industry & war spending destroyed it.

010 1

barlap.bsky.social @barlap.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

It is the same as gun deaths and covid deaths. If you let rich scumbags dictate what gets counted and how, you will always have biased results.

050 5

shivanaabrahmose.bsky.social @shivanaabrahmose.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

Americans deserve to have leaders with character and sacrifice who keep people’s wellbeing above their own self interests. What good is a government that does not care how their operations affect the people of r country! #EpsteinFiles #RemoveTrumpFromOffice #JusticeForReneeGood #JusticeForAlexPretti

000 0

PhysicsChris @physicschris.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

They also miss the number of people killed by all the different types of pollution.

070 7

Raffael Cavallaro @rafcavallaro.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

This is an out of touch urbanist take. Yes if you live in a city with good transit like Boston or New York you could take public transit to work. But if you live 35 miles from your job because that’s the closest you can afford, you’re driving 350 miles a week to pay the rent like it or not.

320 3

Skotty Skeets @erstwhilecon.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

The truth is that the US almost always makes policy decisions, including measurement decisions, based on moneyed interests. Our reactionary Supreme Court has made sure it will stay this way as long as most of us live.

0333 33

El Parodista Digital @elparodistadigital.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

000 0

Patrick @patndave4919.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

But, deaths per mile helped people feel safer when flying. Until of course, those Boeing mishaps.

000 0

Scootrbum @scootrbum.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

That’s the auto lobbies protecting their clients.

040 4

Lu @just-lu.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

Are they going to ban cars? ... or highways?

000 0

Llyr Kellow 🇨🇦✍️👨🏻‍🦳🦋🌈📚🇨🇦 @llyrkellow.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

Research 101 ...

000 0

Jill Danbert @jilldhair.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

Waiting for them to talk about how many lives are changed due to traffic related injuries including TBI. Also when are they going to provide the number of denials of care from the Auto insurance industry?

020 2

Silky @silkythick.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

I won't open Bloomberg links because they go around Bloomberging journalists, what is the suggested alternative?

110 1

silencedoogood @silencedoogood.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

But the company maintained what I like to call: The facade of compliance. Earlier time, different company, "Total Quality" and "ISO 9000" - maintaining the facade of compliance. Hilarious.

000 0

silencedoogood @silencedoogood.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

Yup. Pedo's statistics manual says the best statistics sampling model is to take no samples. Failing that, taking the wrong samples the next best thing. I have a book entitled "Sample-size Determination" by Arthur E. Mace. It came from the library of a Six Sigma company. It was NEVER checked out.

020 2

MikeW @flotsamm.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

They do both. Per capita is useful for identifying specific hazards so it isn' t used as much.

000 0

Leo DP @leodp.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

Interesting Clearly driving a car instead of going on foot allows to cover more km, so normalizing to driven km lowers risk stats for cars Vs bike. But I think that also normalizing per population is not correct & doesn't track usage "intensity" What about traffic deaths per hour driven/walked?

100 1

Blake Tapper @blaketapper.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

This is both true and a complete distortion. Yes, someone moving today or taking mass transit today would not decrease the number of traffic deaths that have already happened, but such changes in behavior would very much change future traffic deaths.

030 3

Voice in the Wind from Cascadia @voiceinthewind.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

People go crazy over the risk of a trans person in a women's bathroom.Yes, the consequences of rape are catastrophic, but the risk is vanishingly low. On the other hand, on average 120 people per day die on US roads. Yet nobody thinks twice about getting in their car.

2230 23

it-techg5.bsky.social @it-techg5.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

Yeah 5

000 0

Copperdome Bodhi @chinacatsunflour.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

honestly, *deaths* miss the point... for every death, there are TONS (that's me admitting I don't have an *actual* number, but it is a LOT) of injuries that require significant follow-up / resources to deal with and lasting chronic pain / debilitation. Deaths are only part of the story.

050 5

BARO @baro.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

Just make everyone's commutes longer, thus the deaths per mile gets safer!

0130 13

Wonderful Secrets @xiratho.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

000 0

Reg Vickers @regv.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

Or counting shooting deaths per bullet sold.

000 0

dreamingcrone.bsky.social @dreamingcrone.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

What a pathetic attempt at fixing statistics!

000 0

siameselover3.bsky.social @siameselover3.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

Oh, don’t worry buy yourself a new 2026 vehicle. If you’re driving under the influence, the car will cut off if.If they think you’re too tired the car will cut off. There’s a camera looking at you at all times. Everything will be watching us. So these cars might have the information.😆

000 0

Ivo Knobloch @isailor56.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

Exactly! With deliberate abandonment of reliable public transport options we have been groomed to accept the “comfortable” car notwithstanding the car not only being a yearly killing machine of inconceivable rate but with concrete covered roads & parking lots also causing massive environmental harm.

010 1

I am SO sick of it all 🥺 @sosickofitall.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

Who thought this one up?

000 0

dangocurt @dangocurt.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

I find it funny they complain about the metric of deaths per mile driven, yet when they want to compare the US to other countries to show how bad it is in the US they use the statistic…deaths per mile driven. No metric is perfect. They shouldn’t swap one for another but use multiple metrics.

120 2

j-waller55.bsky.social @j-waller55.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

An absurd metric. Metropolitan areas that are walkable or have ample mass transit will always skew the results because it's typically safer to walk or ride mass transit than to drive a car or truck.

000 0

katiegonz.bsky.social @katiegonz.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

Oy

000 0

JAIL 47 @47forprison.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

Most accidents happen very close to home.

000 0

frozenhustle.bsky.social @frozenhustle.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

They do or did count cig deaths that way. If I remember, they said each smoke took 3 minutes of life from you.

000 0

Chibit ❤️🧡💛💚💙💜 @chibitbear123.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

Oh that would also hide a lot of accident black spots. Making it harder to redesign infrastructure to be safer.

010 1

Honest Dr John @honestdrjohn.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

They're measure different things. If you reduce traffic miles (a laudable objective) you measure success by reducing deaths per capita. If you make cars safer, and drivers more competent (also a laudable objective) you measure success by reducing deaths per mile.* * oversimplified to fit post

090 9

German Wondering @germanwondering.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

In a country where you drive around the block to obtain a driver license... you just count differently to make it look not so bad.

041 4

Alessandro Rigolon @alerigolon.bsky.social · 17/03/2026

Sure, some people have no choice but to live in exurbs. But several very affluent people choose to live away from cities to have bigger houses, avoid interacting with people of color and low-income folks, and put their kids in segregated schools. These people are choosing to smoke more cigarettes

Raffael Cavallaro@rafcavallaro.bsky.social

This is an out of touch urbanist take. Yes if you live in a city with good transit like Boston or New York you could take public transit to work. But if you live 35 miles from your job because that’s the closest you can afford, you’re driving 350 miles a week to pay the rent like it or not.

5352 35