From: Eliezer S. Yudkowsky (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Jun 05 2002 - 19:08:43 MDT
Cole Kitchen wrote:
> Eliezer, don't you mean "unless losing *$100* would put you under some
> critical threshold"? Let's say that the rent on your apartment is due in an
> hour, and that if you lose more than $75, you will be unable to pay it and
> will then face prompt eviction into Homeless Alley. In this situation you
> will be in trouble whether you lose $100 or $500, so gambling on a 50%
> chance of losing nothing might make the most sense.
> At 12:22 PM 6/5/02 -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:
> >Likewise, a sure loss of
> >$100 is better than a 50% chance of losing $500, unless losing $500 would
> >put you under some critical threshold.
Sorry. Yes, that's what I meant to say.
-- -- -- -- --
Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://intelligence.org/
Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:39 MDT