Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

Topo comments on The Affect Heuristic - Less Wrong

37 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 27 November 2007 07:58AM

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

Comments (65)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Topo 27 November 2007 12:22:22PM 1 point [-]

A 7% probability versus 10% probability may be bad news, but it's more than made up for by the increased number of red beans. It's a worse probability, yes, but you're still more likely to win, you see.

I don't understand. Do you mean you are more likely to win with 7 red beans rather than one but also proportionately more likely to lose with 93 non red beans rather than 9? You wink and suggest there is some great wisdom there. I simply don't even know what the hell you are talking about.

Comment author: wmcleod 01 December 2009 06:20:10PM 15 points [-]

No he's being sarcastic kid...

Comment author: CG_Morton 15 August 2011 11:30:36PM 4 points [-]

In the 1 red/10 beans scenario, you can only win once, no matter how hard you try. With 7 read/100 beans, you simply play the game 100 times, draw 7 red beans, and end up with 7x more money.

Unless the beans are replaced, in which case yeah, what the hell were they thinking?

Comment author: jubydoo 09 September 2011 03:17:42PM 7 points [-]

I think the idea of the game was you get one chance to pick a bean. After all, if you can just keep picking beans until you've picked all the reds, there's not really much point to the so-called game anymore, is there?