= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
pengvado comments on What's going on here? - 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 (61)
I dispute the analogy. With Google, you get the full benefit of finding what you're looking for as long as at least one of the results is right. The cost of multiple results is the time spent reading them, which is not at all the same as the cost of splitting a donation.
Well, the analogy is not perfect but there is a cost to clicking on the other links, too.
When you are splitting between top 5 charities - the difference between expected utility of them drown in the error of your heuristics used to pick top - so the 'cost' of splitting probably boils down to the cost of e.g. paypal processing the payment, and other entirely trivial costs (which you can avoid by e.g. randomizing between top 5)