= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
timtyler comments on Survey Results - 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 (210)
Re: Probability of an average person cryonically frozen today being successfully revived: 22.3, 10, 26.2.
An enormous estimate, IMO - close to that given by the salesmen(!):
http://www.alcor.org/Library/html/WillCryonicsWork.html
It's probably not mentioned enough that cryonics can be justified even if it looks like it probably wont work, as long as it's past some threshold.
From that document:
"If all my best case figures are used, P(now) from the Warren Equation is 0.15, or a bit better than one chance in seven. This is my most optimistic scenario. The pessimistic scenario puts P at 0.0023, or less than one chance in 400."
That's because cryonics salesmen are generally amateur rationalists who are actually trying to believe rationally and report their beliefs honestly.
I am more inclined to believe that they are a self-selected group - drawn from the section of the population with the most optimistic estimates of whether cryonics will work. Usually, "most optimistic" != "most realistic".
No contradiction between the two posts above. The second is, nonetheless, probably more useful in judging accuracy.