I am - the fact that road traffic deaths have been declining steadily despite increasing road traffic supports the conclusion that people don’t titrate their driving to match an exact level of risk, but rather their tendency to drive more dangerously only partially negates the safety enhancements. Not to mention that if people did drive to an exact risk level that they’d have the same risk of death but take way longer to get anywhere under this scheme.
In all fairness, they’re air vents, rather than nipples, so that the sacs can operate like airbags.
Also something I don’t think has been mentioned about this design yet - the skull is designed to fracture to absorb the force of impact. This seems bad; sure it’ll help protect the brain, but it’ll also mean that such a person would have a single use face, since a fragile, easily shattered face would be difficult to impossible to reconstruct. Removing the nose to get rid of vulnerable protrusions and then making the whole face more easily damaged seems a bit odd. You always have the option of using gas bladders to support the face, or something else that could be vented the same way as the “air bags” on the chest so that they could be reinflated post crash.
