The expected monetary value of insurance is negative (or rather, negative in real dollars. It can be positive in nominal dollars but underperform inflation.)
But the utility is not linear in money. Losing e.g. $10,000 might be 20 times as bad as losing $1,000. If so, you should pay $1,000 100% of the time to avoid paying $10,000 8% of the time.
The insurance company averages out over many buyers, so their utility is roughly linear.
Insurance is just trading against different utility scales.
Looking at my own experience, the thing that motivated me to do things likely to fail is the expectation of getting other benefits, even if it failed. One such thing is “experience”, but it could also be “it’ll be fun” or “attempting will give you status even if you fail” or any number of other things.
Or, if there is feedback after relatively little effort (you find out after the first few chapters if people like it).
There’s just something about “work hard for an extended period of time with no feedback until you find out if you won, which is a binary event with low odds” that turns people off, I guess.
I got https://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/4vhqoc/should_we_wipe_mosquitoes_off_the_face_of_the/ to the front page of Reddit, which probably got somewhere on the order of magnitude of 50,000 people to read it or at least think about the idea, which can only help in terms of moving it into the Overton Window.
I know at one point it was number 6 for logged out users.
As a top-50 metaculuser, I endorse all proposals that give me more status.
There’s been a handful of kashrus scandals where people mixed in meat from other supply chains into stuff that was supposed to be kosher certified, which seems a useful reference point for how this can slip through even with an extensive monitoring system intended to prevent that.
An AI robot and a human are hunting. The human is bitten by a snake, and is no longer breathing. The AI quickly calls 911. It yells “My hunting partner was bitten by a poisonous snake and I think they’re dead!” The operator says “Calm down. First, make sure he’s dead.” A gunshot is heard. “Okay, now they’re definitely dead.”
This is a decent guide, but some points are wrong—for instance you can convert to USDC on regular coinbase just fine with no fees.
I successfully made around 90k on the various Trump and Biden markets on Polymarket and have been meaning to write up something about it. The free money is mostly gone, and I haven’t bothered to get the 4% returns over two months because I can get better returns for the same level of risk in DeFi (which I also want to write an article about. 20% close to risk free returns, or 40% slightly risky returns are both very high.)
Are you planning on doing this for more of the sequences? I think that would be great.
I suppose the best thing to do is to tell you to shut up now, right?
This (your hypothesis) appears wrong, however. Assuming the simulation is accurate, the fact that we can think about the simulation hypothesis means that whatever is being simulated would also think about it. If there’s an accuracy deficiency, it’s no more likely to manifest itself around the simulation-hypothesis than any other difference in accuracy.
Although that depends on how we come by the hypothesis. If we come by it like our world did, which is philosophers and other people making argument without any evidence, then there’s no special reason for us to diverge from the simulated, but if we would have evidence (like the kind proposed in http://arxiv.org/abs/1210.1847 or similar proposals) then we would have a reason to believe that we weren’t an exact simulation. In that case, we’d also have evidence of the simulation and not been shut down, so we’d know that your theory is wrong. OTOH, if you’re correct we shouldn’t try to test the simulation hypothesis experimentally.
Some red flags I’ve noticed:
Calls you names instead of engaging in your arguments
Tries to put you in a group (e.g. only an X would something like that)
Says “you’ll realize that I’m right when you’re older”. That’s not a statement that comes up when people are doing Aumann updates (unless one person is unaware of the other’s age).
Putting together an article, for now here’s 22 predictions:
Tether is worth less than 99c by end of year: 2%
Biden or Harris mentions GPT-4: 2%
At least one school district or university is reported to tell students not to use language models (not just one teacher): 15%
A deepfake goes viral (>1 million views) with very few people, at first, realizing that it’s fake: 15%
Russia is widely considered to have captured the capital of Ukraine, Kyiv: 10%
S&P 500 goes up: 80%
Annual CPI inflation released Jan 2023 (for Dec 2022) over 3.5%: 40%
The 7 day rolling average deaths from Covid-19 falls below 100 in the United States for at least one day: 85%
Omicron booster is taken by at least 25% of Americans over 18: 20%
Dems lose the Senate: 75%
Dems lose the house: 85%
Biden is president: 95%
New named prominent variant infects over 10M: 25%
Will the US rejoin the Iran Nuclear Deal before 2023: 25%
Bill signed by Joe Biden that mentions cryptocurrency/blockchain/etc: 65%
Bored Ape Yacht Club floor price is lower than today in dollars ($253k): 80%
Will GME be over $100: 50%
Trump indictment: 25%
Matt Gaetz indictment: 5%
Matt Gaetz in office: 95%
Federal booster mandate: 33%
Masks required on airplanes by Federal law: 65%
I just submitted it and was lucky. It’s the kind of thing that sub likes. I’ve had around three posts hit the front page out of probably thousands since I started, there’s definitely a large luck factor that goes in.
We’re consequentialists here, so I get all the credit for it even if it wasn’t much effort, right?
20% annually on USDC vault at harvest.finance.
Seeing prices go up doesn’t mean there’s demand for them. If demand is low, then this isn’t a market failure, it can make perfect sense that products with low demand don’t get large companies producing them and so the prices don’t reflect economies of scale.
So let’s look at the actual sales. I’ve sold a bit on Amazon and know some tools that can give you good estimates on how many sales an items has had.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00REF5PM2/, the generic currently selling for ~$30, is currently ranked 246,691 in Health & Personal Care (archived: https://archive.is/5RRNF) (this number fluctuates, so might be different when you look). According to http://junglescout.com/estimator , such a rank sells less than 5 a month. Other tools I’ve checked have similar results, under 5 a month.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000GCECRO/, the Tum brand, is ranked 33,992 in Health & Personal Care (https://archive.is/cP0k4). Junglescout estimates 122 sales a month. Another source I checked says 91 a month, so 100 a month is probably close. Now, maybe it would sell more if the price was lower? Sales rank when the price was lower seems to have been in the 10-20,000 range, or 200-300 sales a month.
Let’s say there are 2000 sales a year, if you offer it at $5 and make $2 profit on each you’re making $4,000 a year. That doesn’t seem enough for a large company to deal with. (You should also account for sales at other locations, though. But you pointed to Amazon of proof of demand, when it can simply be proof of lack of supply and lackluster demand.)
I don’t actually know what thresholds companies tend to have for keeping products alive. If you have better information on that it would be helpful.
If the BBC, the UN, and specialists cannot agree on what the word means, neither can politicians or the police. Does it make sense to soldier on fighting a semantic battle that will never be won? Why argue for a word that everyone agrees in confusing and some find loaded?
Daniel Pipes, I Give Up: There Is No Terrorism, There Are No Terrorists
(Noteworthy for changing their opinion after decades of holding the opposite view)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dendrochronology tree rings gets us 14k years
It is, of course, worrying in itself that there’s an open question about whether an extortionist attack via malicious software on a huge company has been conducted by a nation-state, an organised crime group, or a bored teenager.
On almost any given policy question, even if all the relevant facts were beyond dispute, choices would still involve complex value judgments.
Source https://archive.today/bJGcu .
Edit: I should point out that this doesn’t prove that Gleb paid for upvotes, only that someone with a username of Gleb paid for Gleb to get upvotes. I’m leaving it to the moderator to determine what happened and deal with it.
Finished the survey.