Define “risk averse” I used to buy modalert from India and, based on its effectiveness, I feel confident it was not a fake. The biggest risk, I found out, is having a shipment confiscated by US Customs as it is a controlled substance. I received a letter telling me on no uncertain terms that if they found another shipment of modafinil addressed to me, they would prosecute me as a drug smuggler. That was more risk than I was willing to take. Since even the so-called generic modafinil in this country is so expensive, I now take Ritalin instead of modafini. Ritalin is available in a cheap generic in this country, but has side effects that the modafinil didn’t have.
I received a letter telling me on no uncertain terms that if [US Customs] found another shipment of modafinil addressed to me, they would prosecute me as a drug smuggler.
And it’s obviously everyones’ personal choice to decide what level of legal risk they are comfortable with. But a rational person who wanted modafinil should be willing to order it from an online pharmacy at least as often as they’re willing to pirate music or jaywalk without fear of prosecution. Otherwise their preferences for assuming legal risk are inconsistent.
Refusing to take small monetary risks measured 0-10% seems reasonable to me.
As you might imagine given my page on modafinil, I get emails all the time from people interested in modafinil and often in ordering or obtaining modafinil.
I continue to be struck by how many of them, despite apparently reading carefully my page in which I cover empirical observations of the risk (financial and legal), risk estimation, cost-benefit calculations, etc., tell me that they are not ordering because they feel it’s too risky.
Don’t order because you respect the laws, sure; don’t order because you’re worried about unknown long-term health effects, sure (even if I think the existing literature, discounting, and QALYs address that); don’t order because you think that sleep deficits will reduce your creative or higher-order faculties, sure. Those are legitimate reasons. But you’re not ordering because you’re worried about a 1-10% chance of losing $100 in exchange for a chance of gaining the equivalent of several hundred dollars? What?!
I can’t decide whether they’re just lying to me as a form of plausible deniability, self-selected for being the few people who would fail to internalize expected value (mymodafinil.net seems to be selling well to Redditors), having a ‘true refusal’ problem where the risk is just an excuse, or what.
Define “risk averse” I used to buy modalert from India and, based on its effectiveness, I feel confident it was not a fake. The biggest risk, I found out, is having a shipment confiscated by US Customs as it is a controlled substance. I received a letter telling me on no uncertain terms that if they found another shipment of modafinil addressed to me, they would prosecute me as a drug smuggler. That was more risk than I was willing to take. Since even the so-called generic modafinil in this country is so expensive, I now take Ritalin instead of modafini. Ritalin is available in a cheap generic in this country, but has side effects that the modafinil didn’t have.
You mean something like this? That’s not really as meaningful as it seems. There is always some legal risk associated with doing anything since there are so many US laws that no one has even managed to count them, but a pretty serious search through legal database turns up no records of people being prosecuted for modafinil importation, ever. So that letter is 100% posturing by US Customs.
You should probably conclude from this that you’re more likely to be prosecuted for illegally downloading music or jay walking.
And it’s obviously everyones’ personal choice to decide what level of legal risk they are comfortable with. But a rational person who wanted modafinil should be willing to order it from an online pharmacy at least as often as they’re willing to pirate music or jaywalk without fear of prosecution. Otherwise their preferences for assuming legal risk are inconsistent.
Refusing to take small monetary risks measured 0-10% seems reasonable to me.
As you might imagine given my page on modafinil, I get emails all the time from people interested in modafinil and often in ordering or obtaining modafinil.
I continue to be struck by how many of them, despite apparently reading carefully my page in which I cover empirical observations of the risk (financial and legal), risk estimation, cost-benefit calculations, etc., tell me that they are not ordering because they feel it’s too risky.
Don’t order because you respect the laws, sure; don’t order because you’re worried about unknown long-term health effects, sure (even if I think the existing literature, discounting, and QALYs address that); don’t order because you think that sleep deficits will reduce your creative or higher-order faculties, sure. Those are legitimate reasons. But you’re not ordering because you’re worried about a 1-10% chance of losing $100 in exchange for a chance of gaining the equivalent of several hundred dollars? What?!
I can’t decide whether they’re just lying to me as a form of plausible deniability, self-selected for being the few people who would fail to internalize expected value (mymodafinil.net seems to be selling well to Redditors), having a ‘true refusal’ problem where the risk is just an excuse, or what.