= 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
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."
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.
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.