3 ms·
I get what you're saying but taken literally, this would imply that there are multiple, equally high-paying jobs, when in reality there's probably only ever one
by ionforce 13y ago
I get what you're saying but taken literally, this would imply that there are multiple, equally high-paying jobs, when in reality there's probably only ever one, which has a constant value of hate.
What we need is a normalized value that is proportional to pay but inversely proportional to hate. This is probably what you meant.
- dragonwriter 13y ago> What we need is a normalized value that is proportional to pay but inversely proportional to hate. Well, except that positive utility from pay (what you'd really want to weigh against disutility, or "hate") probably isn't directly proportional to pay (several studies have shown decreasing marginal utility from increasing income and even a point beyond which the marginal impact of additional income on realized happiness becomes undetectable.) And you probably want to maximize net utility (utility - disutility), not (utility/disutility).