For-profit companies have more incentives than Alcor does to take risks that deliberately expose themselves to the risk of bankruptcy. When a company goes bankrupt it’s assets (and often many of its obligations) are not destroyed, rather they are often transferred to another organization.
Yes, but if a company has assets then in bankruptcy often both it’s assets and some of its liabilities get transferred. Say Alcor goes bankrupt and a judge has to decide what to do with Alcor’s bodies and its assets. The judge would be more likely to give the assets to an organization that was likely to preserve the bodies.
Assuming somebody would want to take over a bankrupt company with liabilities as nasty as not-quite-dead humans. The liabilities of a bankrupt cryo company would vastly exceed the assets. Also, you can’t get rid of those liabilities, not even part of them, in any way which isn’t a PR disaster.
with liabilities as nasty as not-quite-dead humans.
Actually, these are very-much-dead humans, with the proviso that in the future it’s possible they might become undead, erm, I mean resurrected, erm, I mean not by Jesus, erm, you know what I mean :-D
This will likely get me negative karma (whatever that is) but this is the only way I know how to post here as a new member and my question is one of immediate life and death which I think trhe Less Wrong Community can guide me on.
From a Bayesian perspective should I get rabies shots after having been bitten by a cat in Turkey?
There’s some chance that getting the shots could be detrimental (hospitals everywhere have detrimental likelihoods, in Turkey all trhe more so) and there’s almost no chance at all that I actually got rabies. If I did get it, I will die, horribly and soon. But, the eay I see it, if my chances of having gotten rabies are less than 1⁄300,000 it isn’t worth the aggravation of getting the lengthy series of shots even if there was no potential downside to getting the shots. Due to the fact that there ARE potential downsides to getting the shots I would not get them if the odds of my having contracted rabies are less than 1⁄80,000.
Here are the details.
I accidentally stepped on a stray cat’s tail 3 days ago and it jumped up and bit and scrtached me through my pants, breaking skin at each location.
So, this was a cat, it was provoked, but it was in Istanbul where apparently many ferral dogs and cats have rabies (I don’t know how to define “many”). Also, it bit me on the knee, most cases of rabies involve people bitten on the head or upper extremities.
Being too close to the thing, my own Bayesian thinking can’t be trusted but I’m leaning toward saying that the odds that I contracted rabies are too slight to worry about and to expend resoiurces and risks for. But what do you guys thing? From an approximately Bayesian perspective.
There’s an open thread for this kind of thing. Also, there are plenty of people online with actual legit medical training. It would be better to ask them than us.
ASK A DOCTOR. Seriously, that should be the default for any medical question. If you’re worried that the doctor won’t have a Bayesian perspective, well, go see one anyway. They’re not going to force you to get the shot, and you’ll get the information necessary for you to do the Bayesian calculation.
Consider alternatives such as flying to Germany to get the shots. Take into account how you would feel if you don’t get the shots and worry that you might have rabies.
For-profit companies have more incentives than Alcor does to take risks that deliberately expose themselves to the risk of bankruptcy. When a company goes bankrupt it’s assets (and often many of its obligations) are not destroyed, rather they are often transferred to another organization.
Frozen people are liabilities, not assets.
Yes, but if a company has assets then in bankruptcy often both it’s assets and some of its liabilities get transferred. Say Alcor goes bankrupt and a judge has to decide what to do with Alcor’s bodies and its assets. The judge would be more likely to give the assets to an organization that was likely to preserve the bodies.
Assuming somebody would want to take over a bankrupt company with liabilities as nasty as not-quite-dead humans. The liabilities of a bankrupt cryo company would vastly exceed the assets. Also, you can’t get rid of those liabilities, not even part of them, in any way which isn’t a PR disaster.
Actually, these are very-much-dead humans, with the proviso that in the future it’s possible they might become undead, erm, I mean resurrected, erm, I mean not by Jesus, erm, you know what I mean :-D
This will likely get me negative karma (whatever that is) but this is the only way I know how to post here as a new member and my question is one of immediate life and death which I think trhe Less Wrong Community can guide me on.
From a Bayesian perspective should I get rabies shots after having been bitten by a cat in Turkey?
There’s some chance that getting the shots could be detrimental (hospitals everywhere have detrimental likelihoods, in Turkey all trhe more so) and there’s almost no chance at all that I actually got rabies. If I did get it, I will die, horribly and soon. But, the eay I see it, if my chances of having gotten rabies are less than 1⁄300,000 it isn’t worth the aggravation of getting the lengthy series of shots even if there was no potential downside to getting the shots. Due to the fact that there ARE potential downsides to getting the shots I would not get them if the odds of my having contracted rabies are less than 1⁄80,000.
Here are the details.
I accidentally stepped on a stray cat’s tail 3 days ago and it jumped up and bit and scrtached me through my pants, breaking skin at each location.
So, this was a cat, it was provoked, but it was in Istanbul where apparently many ferral dogs and cats have rabies (I don’t know how to define “many”). Also, it bit me on the knee, most cases of rabies involve people bitten on the head or upper extremities.
The two most relevant artricles I found are http://journals.tubitak.gov.tr/medical/issues/sag-09-39-4/sag-39-4-14-0901-6.pdf
and http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1201971205001840
Being too close to the thing, my own Bayesian thinking can’t be trusted but I’m leaning toward saying that the odds that I contracted rabies are too slight to worry about and to expend resoiurces and risks for. But what do you guys thing? From an approximately Bayesian perspective.
There’s an open thread for this kind of thing. Also, there are plenty of people online with actual legit medical training. It would be better to ask them than us.
I hope you don’t die horribly. :-)
ASK A DOCTOR. Seriously, that should be the default for any medical question. If you’re worried that the doctor won’t have a Bayesian perspective, well, go see one anyway. They’re not going to force you to get the shot, and you’ll get the information necessary for you to do the Bayesian calculation.
Consider alternatives such as flying to Germany to get the shots. Take into account how you would feel if you don’t get the shots and worry that you might have rabies.
Did you die horribly?