= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
khafra comments on How Likely Is Cryonics To Work? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (122)
What if we add in "your ugh field around immediate paperwork is bigger than the one around distant death"? Speaking from an empirical sample of one, .03 is far too low in that case.
OK, I thought from how it was spoken about that the category was for an unknown error causing a problem after the fact.
If it's for the ugh field, it's too low, if it's for an undiscovered error causing problems, it's too high.