CronoDAS comments on Normal Cryonics - Less Wrong

58 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 19 January 2010 07:08PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (930)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: CronoDAS 20 January 2010 12:22:33AM 0 points [-]

I just came up with another excuse: I can't afford to pay for it.

I don't have $29,250 in savings. I also have no income and don't expect to have one in the future. Given the nature of the insurance business, the expected value of buying life insurance should be negative; I can't buy the insurance with my savings and expect to get a larger payout unless I take steps to hasten my own death.

Comment author: orthonormal 20 January 2010 01:47:43AM 7 points [-]

You should know by now that "I just came up with another excuse" is a red flag for motivated cognition. We might not have even found your true reason for rejection yet...

Comment author: CronoDAS 20 January 2010 02:29:17AM *  2 points [-]

Well, my true reason might indeed be something more along the lines of "my parents wouldn't approve of it".

And the original post referred to reasons not to sign up for cryonics as "excuses" so I copied the terminology. ;)

Comment author: CronoDAS 20 January 2010 03:57:05AM *  0 points [-]

Yet another possible "true rejection":

I don't feel as though I deserve to be revived in the future. I suspect that my existence has been a net loss for the world so far. I make garbage. I've been educated at taxpayer expense. I've done very little that anyone would consider a service worth paying for. I'm a leech, a parasite, a (figurative) basement dweller, a near-hikikomori, a lazy bum, a loser, and plenty of other negative terms. And this isn't going to change. So why should I leave the future with the burden of dealing with me?

Comment author: LucasSloan 20 January 2010 06:31:19AM 6 points [-]

Tell you what. If I make it (to the creation of an FAI), and no one else has already done it, I will personally spend the resources to revive you and pay for your upkeep. I further make this pledge for anyone who is cryopreserved and unwanted.

Comment author: CronoDAS 26 January 2010 11:39:43AM *  0 points [-]

Then you're part of the problem. I'm sick of being a charity case.

Comment author: Bindbreaker 20 January 2010 06:35:47AM 0 points [-]

I'm pretty sure most people are concerned more with the scenario where revival comes before FAI.

Comment author: LucasSloan 20 January 2010 06:46:04AM 0 points [-]

I think most people who are concerned about revival aren't really considering on an emotional level FAI at all. I'd considered making the same promise regardless of FAI, but I think that it would be negligent of me to do so, with such important investment opportunities available. Also, I'm not sure I'd have that much money, even for just CronoDAS.

Comment author: wedrifid 20 January 2010 04:02:58AM 1 point [-]

That sounds like it could be closer to home.

Comment author: bogdanb 20 January 2010 11:37:02PM *  0 points [-]

And this isn't going to change.

How do you know? Or, in other words, why do you assign a lower priority to this than to cryopreservation actually working?

(If it didn't work, then it doesn't matter if you deserved it or not, any money you had would still be redistributed in the society, and you wouldn't cause any significant expense anymore.)

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 20 January 2010 01:55:50AM 1 point [-]

Given the nature of the insurance business, the expected value of buying life insurance should be negative

This is thoroughly confused. The expected amount of money out of the deal is negative, but even expected value of money is positive (otherwise people shouldn't buy insurance), and in this particular case you need to think about expected value of your post-revival life, not money.

Comment author: bgrah449 20 January 2010 02:28:23AM 1 point [-]

Life insurance is purchased more for signaling than as a financial instrument. (Life insurance was unsellable when the product was invented; the concept of your family profiting from your death was morbid. Salesmen eventually realized they had to market it as something a man purchases to provide for his family in the unlikely event of his death; buying it was buying the identity of a successful family man.)

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 20 January 2010 02:51:34AM 1 point [-]

Life insurance is purchased more for signaling than as a financial instrument.

I originally wrote "otherwise people won't buy insurance", then recognized the difference, and posted the phrasing "otherwise people shouldn't buy insurance". A lot of insurance really does have positive expected value.

Comment author: CronoDAS 20 January 2010 02:21:27AM *  0 points [-]

The expected amount of money out of the deal is negative

That's what I meant to say.

If were to try to buy cryonics with a life insurance policy, I'll probably run out of savings with which to pay the insurance premiums before I die of natural causes.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 20 January 2010 02:38:44AM 1 point [-]

Ah, OK. Assuming the insane premises that you keep stating, this conclusion makes sense.