But even if we grant that falsehood, she still does not have adequate reason to withdraw her consent for organ donation, as long as she can present proof to evil consequentialist doctors that she's worth more alive than dead.

From what she said "she'd heard that doctors don't try as hard to save donors in hopes of using their organs to save other lives.", it isn't that they actually kill her if she has an organ donor card, just that they don't put in as much effort. Which implies the following beliefs:

1. Doctors don't try so hard to save those with organ donor cards
2. Doctors do try harder to save those with blood donor cards

The conclusion she should draw is that she should carry just a blood donor card, to demonstrate that she is really useful alive, and not at all useful dead, so they should try really, really hard to save her.

To add a data point, I found myself, to put it strongly, literally losing the will to live recently: I'm 20 and female and I'm kind of at the emotional maturity stage. I think my brain stopped saying "live! Stay alive!" and started saying "Make babies! Protect babies!", because I started finding the idea of cryopreserving myself as less attractive and more repulsive, with no change in opinion for preserving my OH, and an increase in how often I thought about doing the right thing for my future kids. To the extent that I now get orders of magnitude more panicked about anything happening to my reproductive system than dying after future children reach adulthood.

I'm not sure for what proportion of women the thought process goes "The future wouldn't want me (because I won't be able to make babies)", with the part in brackets powering the rationalisation-hamster.

Fortunately I learned to spot rationalisation from instinct a while back, but I'm still not sure what I can do, if anything, to correct for the shift.

Chinese census data is notoriously unreliable.

Interesting. If the sex ratio at birth is that high but the sex ratio among the population is that close to 1, what becomes of those extra males who are born?

Well, there is woman shortage in China, so...

Hi, thanks for the link, I just went and filled out Rudi's form, just in case. However, I'm not expecting it to do any good as I'm a UK citizen.

A while ago, ciphergoth gave me an e-mail address for a UK cryonics organisation, and I tried it, but I got no response from them, and I think a couple of other Cambridge types have tried to make contact and got no response, which makes me think that they may not be that reliable at showing up quickly at death scenes either.

CI seem cheap at $28000, so even though I'm not at all sure that a copy of me waking up knowing that it's me is what I mean by immortality, and also believe we're all going to be wiped out by a negative singularity or other risk in the meantime, I'd be happy to sign up for partial peace of mind.

But the difficulty of speedy freezing and then guaranteeing the progress of a frozen corpse from England to CI seems like a bit of a showstopper.

Can anyone think of a good solution to this problem?

Wait, what? I'm taking a stack of identical things and whether they work or not depends on a randomly generated list I've never seen?

"But bargaining is unlike the Ultimatum Game for several reasons. First, neither player is the designated "offer-maker"; either player may begin by making an offer. Second, the game doesn't end after one round; if the dealer rejects my offer, she can make a counter-offer of her own. Third, and maybe most important, neither player is exactly sure about the size of the pot: I don't walk in knowing that the dealer bought the table for $50, and I may not really be sure I value the table at $400."

like dspeyer said, this situation is extremely rare now. Businesses set prices which can remain fixed for months disregarding promotional sales, and customers BATNA without even trying to make a counter offer until they find a shop with a better price- or else just give up on buying the table. This seems like it is mostly only viable and necessary in a modern economy which has reached the scale you get in today's cities (though once the cities start doing it the major stores apply the same policy to any smaller towns where they have branches so it tends to propagate beyond where it makes the most sense). More customers means several businesses can afford to operate within reasonable travelling distance selling the same product for their own prices, and with each business being larger the person you buy a product at a store from is almost never the majority shareholder or entitled to negotiate in any way. Unless you want to let the proles you hire for minimum wage sell your products for whatever they feel is fair, the only other option is to try and guess exactly how much your customers will value a table in the future, and hope that you do this better than the competition so you can actually make a profit. Businesses almost all play chicken without a steering wheel with the customers, losing money when a customer would gladly pay more, and turning down customers who give them an offer which would still let them make a profit. The post is still good, but it applies to something which I have never even tried in a commercial setting, only when negotiating a deal with a friend or relative.

You would still want to check to see whether tigers disappear even when no "anti-tiger pills" are administered.

Depending on how likely the tiger is to eat people if it didn't disappear, and your probability of the pills successfully repelling the tiger given that it's always got rid of the tiger, and the cost of the pill and how many people the tiger is expected to eat if it doesn't disappear? Not always.

I think it is very easy to believe that "death" and "life isn't usually as wonderful as it could be" are as important as existential risk if you weight heavily in favour of the well-being of you, people you know and people in other senses "close" to you.

Caring more about that is also very natural. If I were to tell a typical person that <person they know> was going to die tomorrow, their reaction would be stronger than <person 10 millennia in the future> is going to die under the same circumstances etc.

Of course, shut up and multiply, but only if you actually care about all of the events equally.