<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Matematica subiectivă a dezastrelor</title>
	<atom:link href="http://explorish.net/2009/07/09/matematica-subiectiva-a-dezastrelor/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://explorish.net/2009/07/09/matematica-subiectiva-a-dezastrelor/</link>
	<description>exploratul face lumea mai bună</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 13:53:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: takeda</title>
		<link>http://explorish.net/2009/07/09/matematica-subiectiva-a-dezastrelor/comment-page-1/#comment-2508</link>
		<dc:creator>takeda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 03:02:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://explorish.net/?p=2271#comment-2508</guid>
		<description>e destul de stiintific ce ne propui tu aici :) .

intelegerea mea, tot stiintifica :) . io o iau pe la managementul riscului, care e ecuatia cu doua variabile: probabilitatea de producere a evenimentului de inmultit cu impactul evenimentului in cazul producerii lui. d-aia banuiesc ca statistica publica de care vorbesti are semnificatia asta. dar nu mi se pare inselatoare. e legitima, pana la un punct.

numarul de sanse sa ai un accident de masina este indiscutabil mai mare decat numarul de sanse sa ai un accident de avion. 

amu&#039;... daca te lovesti la 120 la ora pe autostrada, impactul e cert unul dramatic. daca te lovesti la 60... altceva. deci e si aici un soi de arbore de decizie

la avion, daca te nimeresti pe zona distributie fatala, e mai simplu sa evaluezi impactul.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>e destul de stiintific ce ne propui tu aici <img src='http://explorish.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />  .</p>
<p>intelegerea mea, tot stiintifica <img src='http://explorish.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />  . io o iau pe la managementul riscului, care e ecuatia cu doua variabile: probabilitatea de producere a evenimentului de inmultit cu impactul evenimentului in cazul producerii lui. d-aia banuiesc ca statistica publica de care vorbesti are semnificatia asta. dar nu mi se pare inselatoare. e legitima, pana la un punct.</p>
<p>numarul de sanse sa ai un accident de masina este indiscutabil mai mare decat numarul de sanse sa ai un accident de avion. </p>
<p>amu&#8217;&#8230; daca te lovesti la 120 la ora pe autostrada, impactul e cert unul dramatic. daca te lovesti la 60&#8230; altceva. deci e si aici un soi de arbore de decizie</p>
<p>la avion, daca te nimeresti pe zona distributie fatala, e mai simplu sa evaluezi impactul.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://explorish.net/2009/07/09/matematica-subiectiva-a-dezastrelor/comment-page-1/#comment-2491</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:08:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://explorish.net/?p=2271#comment-2491</guid>
		<description>:D 
thanks bro.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> <img src='http://explorish.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif' alt=':D' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
thanks bro.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan</title>
		<link>http://explorish.net/2009/07/09/matematica-subiectiva-a-dezastrelor/comment-page-1/#comment-2486</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:31:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://explorish.net/?p=2271#comment-2486</guid>
		<description>Cea mai buna explicatie despre frica de avion (ca dealtfel intreaga intelepciune a vietii) e in Seinfeld (si va recomand sa re-vedeti si cum o spune):

JERRY: I&#039;m not afraid of flying, although many people do have fear of flying and, I have no arguement with that. I think fear of flying is quite rational because, human

beings cannot fly. Humans have fear of flying same way fish have fear of driving. Put a fish behind the wheel, and they go, &quot;This isn&#039;t right. I shouldn&#039;t be doing this. I

don&#039;t belong here.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cea mai buna explicatie despre frica de avion (ca dealtfel intreaga intelepciune a vietii) e in Seinfeld (si va recomand sa re-vedeti si cum o spune):</p>
<p>JERRY: I&#8217;m not afraid of flying, although many people do have fear of flying and, I have no arguement with that. I think fear of flying is quite rational because, human</p>
<p>beings cannot fly. Humans have fear of flying same way fish have fear of driving. Put a fish behind the wheel, and they go, &#8220;This isn&#8217;t right. I shouldn&#8217;t be doing this. I</p>
<p>don&#8217;t belong here.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

