Would you roll the dice on your life? At what cost if any?

[TStoneMBD]

for 1 billion i think i would take 1/3 chance of death. 1/3 seems to small though. im thinking more like 1/3.5.

LETS GAMBOOL

[BluffTHIS!]

TStone = LAG. But notice that he is actually more likely to receive such action since he's willing to give it. Just like poker.

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
Say you rolled the dice and won the first time at whatever number of sides the dice had, if given the oppurtunity to, would you roll again?

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[Masquerade]

I think DS's analysis is way off the mark. Although I personally wouldnt take a 1 in 1000 risk of death for $25,000 I think most of the world's population would - or at least seriously consider it. Drug mules who swallow condoms of cocaine are taking a far higher risk of death for much less reward. Grunts who join the US Army and get sent to Iraq or Afghanistan have at least a 1 in 1000 chance of dying there for what? $20K a year? Are their actions illogical? Perhaps they are, but they may have families to support and the Army was the only job available. But here's the real kicker - we're all going to get certain death anyway and not get paid a cent! What's logical about that? I ticked the 1000 sides for the $1 billion but I could probably talk myself into it for 100.

[Masquerade]

[ QUOTE ]
Note that the choices "a number larger than a billion", and > 1,000,000,000 are the same, unless we are British, in which case a billion is 1,000,000,000,000, or what we call a "trillion" in the US. Hence the amount of the prize is also ambiguous.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope, a British billion has been 10^9, the same as everywhere else, for 35+ years.

[Analyst]

There has been a fair amount of research into this topic, covering not just life and death decisions such as the given question but also quality of life. It is very useful in medical decision analysis, insurance and the like.

If I recall correctly, the typical value is ~$10 per "micromort", a 1 in 1,000,000 chance of dying. In other words, people will accept that one in a million risk for about $10 or, corversely, will pay $10 to mitigate that risk. This value scales fairly well for low levels of risk but the curve becomes non-linear as risks increase, and rises very, very steeply once you get to the 1 in 100 or so type of risk level.

[wmspringer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
$50 million would be enough for most people. Maybe $100 million. After that, it gets a bit extravagant.

I mean, I think there is more difference between $1 and $200 million (in terms of personal utility) than $200 million and $1 billion, for most people.

[/ QUOTE ]

10 million or 1 billion it would make no difference to me, for the reason you originally stated, i.e never having to work again.

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on whether you just want to be comfortable, or want to go and DO something with the money.

Here's what I figure:
Take the one billion dollars. Invest conservatively; let's say you get only 5%. That's $50 million a year in interest. You could literally spend the rest of your life finding worthy causes to donate money to; with that much cash available and a bit of work, I'd imagine you could help out quite a few people. I certainly know of a number of places I'd like to put money if I had the chance.

[BruceZ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Note that the choices "a number larger than a billion", and > 1,000,000,000 are the same, unless we are British, in which case a billion is 1,000,000,000,000, or what we call a "trillion" in the US. Hence the amount of the prize is also ambiguous.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope, a British billion has been 10^9, the same as everywhere else, for 35+ years.

[/ QUOTE ]

You mean you argue with Johnny Goodtimes Useless Knowledge?

From this discussion at mathforum.org from 2000, it would appear that the older system is still in use in Germany and perhaps other parts of Europe, and it is still commonly used in Britain as well, though Britain has largely converted.

[Hextallin]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
$50 million would be enough for most people. Maybe $100 million. After that, it gets a bit extravagant.

I mean, I think there is more difference between $1 and $200 million (in terms of personal utility) than $200 million and $1 billion, for most people.

[/ QUOTE ]

10 million or 1 billion it would make no difference to me, for the reason you originally stated, i.e never having to work again.

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on whether you just want to be comfortable, or want to go and DO something with the money.

Here's what I figure:
Take the one billion dollars. Invest conservatively; let's say you get only 5%. That's $50 million a year in interest. You could literally spend the rest of your life finding worthy causes to donate money to; with that much cash available and a bit of work, I'd imagine you could help out quite a few people. I certainly know of a number of places I'd like to put money if I had the chance.

[/ QUOTE ]


Agreed. I would like to think that the value of my life depends on how I can better the lives of others. Unfortunatly, I feel that with $1,000,000,000 I could better the lives of far more people than I will be able to do in my lifetime. I'd have to say >1. My answer would change dramatically if it were only $10,000,000.

[warlockjd]

My loved ones would get the $ when I die.

I have no kids or significant other at the moment.

Flip the coin!