[extropy-chat] Preparing for low-probability events

[Dan Clemmensen]

Hara Ra wrote:

> Har Har Har. The USA RDF (Rapid Deployment Force) is barely a regiment 
> (1000 men). Vs how many kilopeople got hurt here....
>
>> OK, it's not reasonable to prepare for each of these events 
>> individually. However, we can perhaps prepare for all of them 
>> collectively. Any major catastrophe results in a set of consequences, 
>> many of which are common. Therefore, we (i.e. the people of the 
>> world, as represented by our governments) might create a generic 
>> resource to respond to low-probability catastrophes.
>
>
Hara, I do not believe that any existing entity can fulfill the 
requirement. I am proposing that we create an entity that can fulfill 
the requirement. In the US at the current time. the rhetoric would 
require us to focus on "terrorism." We could bring the appropriate 
resources into existence by justifying them in terms of defense against 
a "terrorist attack." The US should create a response to an attack 
against any major US city: such a response could, with a tiny 
incremental cost, also help respond to a low-probability external 
catastrophe.

Take your example. Assume the US really has an RDF of 1000 men. If this 
force can truly be instantaneously effective against an arbitrary 
"enemy," then they could (with at most trivial additional training) be 
effective in a arbitrary catastrophe. 1000 people who can be deployed in 
24 hours would make a huge difference in terms of lives saved.

An organization of 1,000-men, applied to the problem immediately, might 
save 1,000,000 lives. Even if, in a fit of overweening hubris, you think 
that the US should provide 1/2 of the overall quick-reaction resource, 
we end up with  2,000 men (half ours, half others.) That's still a huge 
force multiplier compared to the response we can currently provide.