timtyler comments on On dollars, utility, and crack cocaine - Less Wrong

13 Post author: PhilGoetz 04 April 2009 12:00AM

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

Comments (97)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: PhilGoetz 04 April 2009 01:56:39PM 1 point [-]

A good reason for not playing the lottery is that you can get better odds by playing roulette, or using other forms of gambling.

Roulette doesn't give a big enough payoff to move you up into the steep area of your utility function, so it doesn't get the "a dollar won is worth more than a dollar spent" effect.

It would also be a plausible conjecture that, if someone's utility function is sigmoid, and they're on the low end of it, their model of their utility function is an exponential. That would enhance the effect.

Comment author: timtyler 04 April 2009 02:20:24PM 2 points [-]

Re: Roulette doesn't give a big enough payoff [...]

Bet twice consecutively, then. Roulette's payoffs are flexible enough to give you practically any odds you desire.

...and what about the diminishing utility of money? Often you don't want to trade odds for cash.