4 ms·
Note that the bet is the conjunction of those three propositions, so you don't have to think any one of them is particularly unlikely to think that all three of
by pash 12y ago
Note that the bet is the conjunction of those three propositions, so you don't have to think any one of them is particularly unlikely to think that all three of them together are.
For example, if you consider the propositions to be roughly independent, you might believe each one of them is individually nearly 80% likely to occur, yet you'd rationally believe Sam would be more likely than not to lose the bet, since 0.5^(1/3) = 0.794.
- unholiness 12y agoThe whole point of the particular three propositions is that they're highly correlated. Each condition involves an aggregate of many companies. If any of the conditions is true it says more about the general tech climate than it does about the luck of any particular company. Personally, I might put the odds of each at 60%, 70%, and 90%, respectively. Independently, that gives me a mere 37.8% chance of losing. However, I also think that condition 1 succeeding is highly indicative that the others will succeed too. So, if it were really $100,000 at stake, I wouldn't take the bet. The real conundrum is that stakes of winning aren't $100,000. The loser's money goes to charity, and the winner's takings are the publicity gained from being right. No doubt both participants feel that the publicity is worth more than $100,000. They don't need to have even 50% confidence to take the bet.