I think this kind of loss aversion is entirely sensible for IRL betting, but makes no sense for the platonic ideal betting.
Transaction costs exist. How big those costs are depends on circumstances. For example if you need to exchange money into/ out of USD then the transaction costs are larger.
It’s also not clear that this bet isn’t a scam of some kind. Especially as there is no clear reason for a non-scammer to offer this bet.
This is much the same as that “doctor cutting up healthy patient for organs” moral dilemma, where the question asserts there is 0 chance of getting caught, but human intuitions are adjusted to a non-zero chance of getting caught.
Human intuition automatically assumes things aren’t frictionless spheres in a vacuum, even when the question asserts that it is.
You can’t just tell people that this is definitely not a scam and get people to say what they would do if they somehow gained 100% certainty it wasn’t a scam. Human intuitions are adjusted for the presence of scams. The calculations our mind is running don’t have a “pretend scams don’t exist” option.
It’s also not clear that this bet isn’t a scam of some kind. Especially as there is no clear reason for a non-scammer to offer this bet.
The standard scenario would be like this:
I send you a check for $110. Then we arrange a Zoom meeting, and you flip a fair coin in front of the camera. Heads, you keep the money. Tails, you send $210 to a specified Bitcoin address.
I think this kind of loss aversion is entirely sensible for IRL betting, but makes no sense for the platonic ideal betting.
Transaction costs exist. How big those costs are depends on circumstances. For example if you need to exchange money into/ out of USD then the transaction costs are larger.
It’s also not clear that this bet isn’t a scam of some kind. Especially as there is no clear reason for a non-scammer to offer this bet.
This is much the same as that “doctor cutting up healthy patient for organs” moral dilemma, where the question asserts there is 0 chance of getting caught, but human intuitions are adjusted to a non-zero chance of getting caught.
Human intuition automatically assumes things aren’t frictionless spheres in a vacuum, even when the question asserts that it is.
You can’t just tell people that this is definitely not a scam and get people to say what they would do if they somehow gained 100% certainty it wasn’t a scam. Human intuitions are adjusted for the presence of scams. The calculations our mind is running don’t have a “pretend scams don’t exist” option.
The standard scenario would be like this:
I send you a check for $110. Then we arrange a Zoom meeting, and you flip a fair coin in front of the camera. Heads, you keep the money. Tails, you send $210 to a specified Bitcoin address.
Either way, the check bounces.
Even if the check is good, I would rather miss out on $5 than attend a Zoom meeting.
And the coin flip is prerecorded, with the invisible cut hidden in a few moments of lag.
And this also adds the general hassle of arranging a zoom meeting, being online at the right time and cashing in the check.