User Tag List

1. 1 in 1 billion is probably a better chance than I'd have without accepting that deal, so I'd take those chances for a cup of tea or something equally cheap and tasty!

2. Originally Posted by Santtu
Really? Would you pay \$7,000 now to lessen your chance of death by 1 in a billion?

If not, you are demanding too much money by your own standards.

When the quantities are changed at the optimum point, you would be equally happy to do the exchange either way.

If you don't have \$7,000, adjust for whatever money you have at the moment, like \$700 and 1 in 10 billion.
If they could really guarantee that... I probably would pay it. I'm not the sort who likes to take higher chances on dying. But I'd also consider accepting \$7,000 for a higher risk. Yeah, I think it's worth that much. Don't ask me why, it's subjective valuing.

3. Originally Posted by athenian200
If they could really guarantee that... I probably would pay it. I'm not the sort who likes to take higher chances on dying. But I'd also consider accepting \$7,000 for a higher risk. Yeah, I think it's worth that much. Don't ask me why, it's subjective valuing.
For those that are statistically aware, please don't mess with people natural human biases. They tend to be rather adaptive.

As I keep stressing, it is not always about expected value.

It is a bad habit to risk your life. You also need to understand how often you will encounter these situations, and react accordingly.

Consider the following:
If you value your like at X for 1 in a billion.

And you act the same way for a billion trials (say calculated by a computing cluster, in minutes), you value your life at,
X * billion for about 63% chance of death.

Also, if you value your life at X for 1 in 365 (in reference to the famous birthday example).

And you act the same way for 25 trials, you value your life at,
X*25 for over a 50% chance of death.

Beyond a certain level, making your money actually worth something to you an yours, or anyone, becomes difficult. I have little concern about becoming filthy rich.

Also, I would not trust the person quoting the odds. 1 in a billion, yeah right!

As the joke goes: 90% of statistics are wrong, 75% made-up on the spot, and 25% wrong by several orders of magnitude.

An exaggeration, yes, but I would need to check to see that the so-called one in a billion is not rigged to be more like a sure thing.

Randomness is just an abstraction for the extremes of chaos. If you can nail down the state of a system well-enough, we would often see that it is not random, really.

I have friends who can fairly consistently roll-dice to come-up high numbers. Some of them are real obvious about how they "roll" the dice to come up with those numbers. Of course, you get them to roll further, and their amazing skill
diminishes.
----

But with that said I would say around \$20 for 1 in a billion.

4. I find it funny to have presented lowest value of life so far, and found a thread where it states ENTP are the risk takers

I like whatever's attitude too, a cup of tea for a chance of one in a billion death is good for me too.

I wouldn't live better if I claimed to have infinite value to my life and to refuse gambling it for worse ratios. I'd just miss out much of my life.

Still, I guess I could have some value to life if I never owned money. But I have to have something in my life.. if all stimulation were deprived of me, I wouldn't have learned to speak or walk, which would have made my life really dull.

5. For the 1/1 billion and 1/1million chances, I would be willing to do it for free. It's such a slim chance that I'd actually die. Thing is, if the people actually asked me, I would name as high a price as they would let me of course, lol.

For the 1/2 chance, I would avoid actually accepting a bet like this irl as much as possible. With such a big chance that I'm not going to survive, it wouldn't matter how much money I received for it....I'd rather be done and happy with the fact that I'd still be alive. If I was forced, I would prefer 10 billion dollars at the least.

6. Originally Posted by ptgatsby
A curious question (again from Overcoming Bias);

What is the least money would you ask for to accept for taking one in one billion chance of dying?

(My answer is \$14 in case anyone is curious.)

I'm curious how people answer this more than the answer themselves. Would you ever accept this bet?
I wouldn't bet at all. I don't see the benefit to this wager. If I die, then I die. I don't see the point in reducing your chance of dying if you're obviously going to die some day.

Edit: I realised I got it backwards. Thought we weren't supposed to be paying money to avoid dying, but nevertheless, my answer remains the same.

7. This is a funny question because to me, 1 in a Billion is still a chance and what is even worse it is a set up for an ironic situation therefore it is the most dangerous situation to be had- therefore there is no amount of money in the world that I would accept,lol.

8. I take the bet everyday -- and for free. I think most people do, without thinking about it -- at least for the higher numbers. As for the 1:2? Meh, I still probably wouldn't give a shit -- a nickel or a trillion, it's all the same.

9. Originally Posted by Recluse
With my luck, I wouldn't accept any variation of the bet. However, I did offer my kidney to someone with renal failure.

Incidentally, I've been informed that I won't be able to qualify for the donation if I can't overcome/mask the anxiety related to my agoraphobia. Apparently, the physicians won't accept a living donor who has a medical issue such as anxiety. This finickiness annoys me, under the circumstances. The decision should be mine alone. Damn doctors!

I suppose that my offer is a way of accepting a bet similar to what you suggested, since every operation carries some risk of death (though slight in this case). Not everyone is motivated by money. But the concept is similar.

Why did you choose money as the main motivator?

This person still needs a kidney, by the way, so if anyone without a medical or psychological condition is willing to donate, they would be extending a life. The human body only needs one kidney, which will take over the functions of the other if the other is removed.
The idea is that the anti-anxiety drugs destroy the kidney.

It is interesting because when you ask them when they prescribe the drug they say no.

Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•