byrnema 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: byrnema 22 January 2010 03:27:04AM *  1 point [-]

OK, here's a rationality test.

To test in some measure if your assumptions and hypothesis about cryonics are calibrated, how many people do you estimate were cryono-preserved at Alcor in 2009? (Don't look! And don't answer if you already know or knew for 2008 or another recent year.)

Later edit: The number of people who signed up for cryonics in 2009 is available as well if you want to estimate that too.

If you want, provide your estimate and something about your calculation.

Comment author: RobinZ 22 January 2010 03:46:24AM *  2 points [-]

Normal distribution, truncated at zero ... mean 10, standard deviation 50.

And that's ten and fifty I mean, not one hundred or five.

Edit: Justification is a sense that there are less than 1e4 people on ice so far, suspected to be based on flipping past such a statistic on a webpage without consciously reading. Expect number of people signed up is between twice and thirty times number stored.

Edit mk. 2: Or between zero and twenty, whichever is greater.

Edit mk. 3: I have now checked my numbers. ...Interesting.