First, it's only 30,000 for neuro.

I was just quoting P&T's number. That show aired in 2004 so I assumed the price would be lower today (not to mention the neuro discount).

Second, your utility in hookers is sublinear.

Of course, that's why it's a lower bound :)

Huh, I had completely forgotten that P&T did an anti-cryonics bit. Disappointing. On the other hand, their basic point ("Why not spend that $125,000 on hookers?") reminded me of Reedspacer's Lower Bound.

Maybe because e^0 = 1?

Hm, I was going to propose that the threads continue on the 1st and 15th of each month (the 14th of February, of course), and be titled "Open Thread: Ides of March edition", "Open Thread: Calends of April edition", etc.. Because the classical Roman calendar is awesome.

Much less in costume!

In fact it's almost exactly the mirror image of Eliezer's Gung Nyvra Zrffntr, which is pretty awesome.

I usually try not to push people on this particular point unless I think they're already very high-level; my default assumption is that people are very akrasic and fragile when it comes to charity.

Fair enough.

However, I'm raising my estimate of Landsburg's level based on this

Glad to hear it; I've been a fan of his for years, based mainly on his Slate column and his first two books.

I got 0.6N (=6.7e-11 * 2e30 * 100/(1.5e11)^2). Still small, but potentially measurable. (Er, except for the whole frame-of-reference thing mentioned above.)

That sounds like a koan.

Obligatory quote re. your footnote 2:

—Then, said Cranly, you do not intend to become a protestant?

—I said that I had lost the faith, Stephen answered, but not that I had lost self-respect. What kind of liberation would that be to forsake an absurdity which is logical and coherent and to embrace one which is illogical and incoherent?

—James Joyce