The case for altering our brains 🧠:

news about danger was far more important than good news - only the paranoid survived.

In modern times, the danger is far away and rarely actually affects us, but our vestigial limbic resonance with scary news remains.

If procedure helped change this bahavior, would you do it?

Founding Engineer shadow.xyz | Values-Aligned Communities | citizen of Black Rock City

This is really good question. 

A form of “danger regulator” could have significant effects, it would make us likely happier. But we’d ignore important signals that could be harmful for us. And a sufficiently motivated person could take advantage, not that our existing state already isn’t.

Never.

It's like someone in a flood-prone area foregoing flood insurance.

There is a trick in the "rare" - is it long-tailed "rare" or exponential "rare"?

I think we're in the long-tailed case.