ike comments on We really need a "cryonics sales pitch" article. - Less Wrong

10 Post author: CronoDAS 03 August 2015 10:42PM

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

Comments (99)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 04 August 2015 12:01:15PM 1 point [-]

And a 5% chance of cryonics working seems hopelessly optimistic to me. So let's make that a 0.0000001% chance of working. Suddenly it seems like a pretty lousy deal. Do you think any rational person would still say yes?

No, they wouldn't. If that really is your estimated probability (where did you get those six zeros from? why not three, or twenty?), then you should not sign up for cryo. Those involved think there's a much higher chance than that. In fact, 5% is the usual order of magnitude.

And you won't have any other use for that money when you're dead. Whether it would be better to give it away and certainly die is a whole other issue. (EA meets cryonics — there's a subject for an interesting debate.)

So yes, those signing up are betting on a long shot, but not an impossibly long one.

Comment author: ike 04 August 2015 01:21:50PM 0 points [-]

And you won't have any other use for that money when you're dead.

That's assuming you'd otherwise die with enough money to pay for it, and neglecting fees that need to be paid while alive. "Life insurance" doesn't solve this, you still need to pay for it.

Comment author: CBHacking 08 August 2015 09:26:29AM 1 point [-]

Many employers provide life insurance. I've always thought that was kind of weird (but then, all of life insurance is weird; it's more properly "death insurance" anyhow) but it's a think. My current employer provides (at no cost to me) a life insurance policy sufficient to pay for cryonics. It would currently be given charitably - I have no dependents and my family is reasonably well off - but I've considered changing that.

Comment author: ike 09 August 2015 03:22:18AM 0 points [-]

That doesn't change the situation much, if you can sell it (or get higher pay for refusing it). If you somehow can't extract value from it (doubtful unless there are laws against selling), then it's relevant.

Comment author: CBHacking 21 August 2015 09:42:43AM 0 points [-]

I haven't investigated selling it, but up to a certain multiple of my annual salary it's included in my benefits and there is no value in setting it lower than that value; I wouldn't get any extra money.

This is a fairly standard benefit from tech companies (and others that have good benefits packages in the US), apparently. It feels odd but it's been like this at the last few companies I worked for, differing only in the insurance provider whose policy is used and the actual limit before you'd need to pay extra.

Comment author: ike 21 August 2015 10:37:16PM 1 point [-]

I just looked it up, and apparently reselling life insurance is so popular it has its own word: viatical. I expect you'd get reasonably close to fair value for it, and if you wouldn't pay fair value for it, you probably should be willing to accept fair value for it.

Although I'm not entirely clear if you can resell life insurance bought by an employer.