= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
NancyLebovitz comments on Open thread, 16-22 June 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (172)
I dislike football and I realized a few days ago that a win for the US would bring me the most utility - the largest number of soccer fans will [probably] be upset this way, which should decrease the global popularity of the sport slightly.
At any rate, if you are purely maximazing global utility, then the conclusion looks sounds.
A win for the US would probably increase the interest in soccer in the US, which I think would be a net loss by your standards.
It'd also be a loss to the US, I think. I understand that the US team is, and has always been, not considered that great? If so, then a win by the US team implies that it's an extreme event for the US team; this will attract new fans due to the publicity and novelty of the US team winning; but then, because it was an extreme event, the US team will regress to its mean and consistently lose for the indefinite future, making all its old and new fans unhappy and more than wiping out any gains from having briefly made its old fans happy until the new fans finally attrit.
Sometimes people are loyal to teams that keep losing.
Yes, that's the problem.
I live in the UK, so I don't care much if soccer interest increases slightly in the States, since that's sort of like caring about poverty in Palo Alto, while living in a hut in rural Africa.
At any rate, I am fairly sure that most countries which care about football will be very upset if the US of all countries wins it.