The dollar value that I treat my life as being worth is heavily influenced by my wealth.
If I’m currently willing to pay $100k to avoid a 1% chance of dying, that doesn’t mean that a 100x increase in my estimate of life expectancy will convince me to pay $100k to avoid a 0.01% chance of dying—that change might bankrupt me.
If I’m currently willing to pay $100k to avoid a 1% chance of dying, that doesn’t mean that a 100x increase in my estimate of life expectancy will convince me to pay $100k to avoid a 0.01% chance of dying—that change might bankrupt me.
I’m not following how this example is influenced by your wealth. In both scenarios, you are paying $100k. If it was $100k to avoid a 1% chance vs a $1k to avoid a 0.01% chance, then I see how wealth matters. If you have $105k in savings, paying $100k would bring you down to $5k in savings which is a big deal, whereas paying $1k would bring you down to $104k which isn’t too big a deal.
I think this is due to (something like) diminishing marginal utility. But even with that factored in, my sense is that the tremendous value of post-singularity life overwhelms it.
I expect there are a lot more ways to buy a 0.01% risk reduction for $100k.
Let me approach this a different way. Is there anything deterring you from valuing your life at $3^^^3? What behaviors would such a person have that differ from a person who values their life at $1 billion?
What behaviors would such a person have that differ from a person who values their life at $1 billion?
Driving, perhaps. I arrived at something like $2.50/mile at a $10B valuation of life. So for a $1B valuation, that’d be $0.25/mile, which seems reasonable to pay in various situations. But at a $3^^^3 valuation it would no longer be worth it.
Is there anything deterring you from valuing your life at $3^^^3?
With the estimates I made in this post, it doesn’t seem reasonable to value it at something crazily high like that.
The dollar value that I treat my life as being worth is heavily influenced by my wealth.
If I’m currently willing to pay $100k to avoid a 1% chance of dying, that doesn’t mean that a 100x increase in my estimate of life expectancy will convince me to pay $100k to avoid a 0.01% chance of dying—that change might bankrupt me.
I’m not following how this example is influenced by your wealth. In both scenarios, you are paying $100k. If it was $100k to avoid a 1% chance vs a $1k to avoid a 0.01% chance, then I see how wealth matters. If you have $105k in savings, paying $100k would bring you down to $5k in savings which is a big deal, whereas paying $1k would bring you down to $104k which isn’t too big a deal.
I think this is due to (something like) diminishing marginal utility. But even with that factored in, my sense is that the tremendous value of post-singularity life overwhelms it.
I expect there are a lot more ways to buy a 0.01% risk reduction for $100k.
Let me approach this a different way. Is there anything deterring you from valuing your life at $3^^^3? What behaviors would such a person have that differ from a person who values their life at $1 billion?
Driving, perhaps. I arrived at something like $2.50/mile at a $10B valuation of life. So for a $1B valuation, that’d be $0.25/mile, which seems reasonable to pay in various situations. But at a $3^^^3 valuation it would no longer be worth it.
With the estimates I made in this post, it doesn’t seem reasonable to value it at something crazily high like that.