Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Risk Everything (2007)

web.archive.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 142 posts

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#31

Post by mcv »

frobozz wrote: post #14
googlryas wrote: post #3

I take objection to this line: > When I share this story with other sailors, they are universally aghast that we helped these refugees. I wonder what kind of sailors they are conversing with, if at all.

Also: > The prevailing wisdom for this seafaring situation is “Don’t Stop.” The law is to render assistance. That law was based on prevailing wisdom. Apparently the author moves in different circles to the rest of seafaring folk.

I think it really depends on where you are. There are still many places in the world where piracy is real, and where distress can be used to lure naive victims. In other places, piracy isn't an issue and you're legally required to offer help.

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#32

Post by elcomet »

renewiltord wrote: post #21
elcomet wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't assume this. That's just the definition of "risking everything". If you loose, then you have nothing left and you are at the bottom.

Right, but really risking everything is almost impossible to do. Like if I took my life savings and put them on red, I'm still going to be fine because I'll outrace that loss in no time. To really risk everything I have to burn bridges, damage my brain, and lose all my money. In the end, you always have yourself. Except when you die. And then it doesn't matter. Interestingly, though, I've always stopped for people on…

Thanks for this interesting perspective!

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#33

Post by weregiraffe »

rramadass wrote: post #17

From Rudyard Kipling's If ; If you can make one heap of all your winnings And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss, And lose, and start again at your beginnings And never breathe a word about your loss; If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew To serve your turn long after they are gone, And so hold on when there is nothing in you Except the Will which says to them: ‘Hold on!’

If you can make one heap of all your winnings

     And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,

  And lose, and start again at your beginnings

     And never breathe a word about your loss;
Then you are a gambling addict and need medical attention?

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#34

Post by kqr »

oarabbus_ wrote: post #28
kqr wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your statement sort of assumes the worst case has negative infinity utility. Which, granted, is usually how economists model human behaviour, but perhaps not how humans behave in practise. (If death truly had negative infinity utility, it would overpower the benefit of everything and we couldn't do anything.)

>(If death truly had negative infinity utility, it would overpower the benefit of everything and we couldn't do anything.) It's true death has utility in an economic sense, as one needs not look further than the funeral/death care industry to find utility. But if we are talking about death of the self, the negative infinite utility claim seems more convincing than the non-negative-infinite one. In fact, negative infi…

I am talking about death of the self.

When crossing the street, there's a tiny risk of death, but a fairly good chance of a somewhat desirable outcome (getting to the other side.) If you considered your death to have negative infinity utility, and the desirable outcome to have finite positive utility, then you would opt to not cross the street ever, because negative infinity times small probability plus positive finite number times large probability is still negative infinity in total.

Essentially, any time you're weighing up your options, and one of the outcomes has negative infinity utility with non-zero probability, then the outcome of that course of action also has negative infinity utility, the way these terms are usually defined.

Thus, given the behaviour of most people, they do not think of their death has having negative infinity utility.

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#35

Post by DocTomoe »

fortysixdegrees wrote: post #11
googlryas wrote: post #3

I take objection to this line: > When I share this story with other sailors, they are universally aghast that we helped these refugees. I wonder what kind of sailors they are conversing with, if at all.

I found that more than a little odd. Sailors are universally out to help other seafarers and hope for help themselves when they need it. This was the guys first blue water trip, I guess he wasnt a true sailor yet, and hadn't lived life abord for long enough to adopt the culture.

Sailors are. They intimately know the sea and her dangers, they know looming death and despair during many months of being subjects to powers immeasurably stronger than any human can ever imagine.

I would argue that two blokes on a sailboat doing fun rides in the Caribbean are hardly sailors. I guess when they talked to other 'sailors' who were 'agast', it was the Jonas Grumby/Gilligan type.

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#36

Post by trompetenaccoun »

necovek wrote: post #7
googlryas wrote: post #3

I take objection to this line: > When I share this story with other sailors, they are universally aghast that we helped these refugees. I wonder what kind of sailors they are conversing with, if at all.

The author is obviously from the US where fear of others permeats everything (and requires carry of arms to defend one's home, for instance). They even talked of pirates in the story. While US is not universally like that, there is probably a large proportion that is (citation missing).

I may not know much about how horrible the US is because I've never been, but refugees are regularly endangered in European waters despite help being technically around. In one case I heard of even the Italian coastguard would do nothing until the UN was called and put pressure on them. The refugees had called emergency services and were ignored, without UN intervention they would have died.

So yeah, you might want to check your bias. This isn't something that just happens in the US, it's a worldwide thing. Refugees are mistreated in Africa, in Asia - everywhere.

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#37

Post by ivalm »

oarabbus_ wrote: post #28
kqr wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your statement sort of assumes the worst case has negative infinity utility. Which, granted, is usually how economists model human behaviour, but perhaps not how humans behave in practise. (If death truly had negative infinity utility, it would overpower the benefit of everything and we couldn't do anything.)

>(If death truly had negative infinity utility, it would overpower the benefit of everything and we couldn't do anything.) It's true death has utility in an economic sense, as one needs not look further than the funeral/death care industry to find utility. But if we are talking about death of the self, the negative infinite utility claim seems more convincing than the non-negative-infinite one. In fact, negative infi…

True negative infinities, even discounted, are still infinite, so not very useful as it makes all trajectories equal (negatively infinite).

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#38

Post by dist1ll »

Jensson wrote: post #29
dist1ll wrote: post #20

Maybe I'm a bit cynical, but I don't see anything admirable about this mindset. In fact, I think it's incredibly selfish. What kind of inhumane person would "risk everything" on a business venture? This reads like a dystopian horror novel exploring the extremes of a deranged entrepreneur's mind.

Most students risks more than everything, as worst case they will be ridden with debt without any additional job prospects. For an entrepreneur at worst they can declare bankruptcy and be better off than the student. So it doesn't seem like entrepreneurship is all that risky compared to what average students go through.

losing all your money =/= risking everything

Many people have more things going on in their lives except their bank account. Family, spouse, children, friends. Losing them is what real loss means to me.

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#39

Post by OtomotO »

Jensson wrote: post #29
dist1ll wrote: post #20

Maybe I'm a bit cynical, but I don't see anything admirable about this mindset. In fact, I think it's incredibly selfish. What kind of inhumane person would "risk everything" on a business venture? This reads like a dystopian horror novel exploring the extremes of a deranged entrepreneur's mind.

Most students risks more than everything, as worst case they will be ridden with debt without any additional job prospects. For an entrepreneur at worst they can declare bankruptcy and be better off than the student. So it doesn't seem like entrepreneurship is all that risky compared to what average students go through.

Whenever someone says that, it's immediately clear which country they come from.

God's own... The land of the free.

I am older now and sooo happy I had the luck to be born in a country where studying is not a debt-trap.

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#40

Post by shisisms »

It’s easy to take this observation in literal terms. Most of the comments point to the danger of “risking everything (financially)” and of course there’s a potential stupidity in that.

Reframed as psychologically risking everything is perhaps a more resonant alternative view. What this means is the notion that “you’re all in”, all of you. That your entire being is at risk. Sports perhaps the easiest illustration, where your entire idea of person is at risk. That’s when the dopamine flies along with the adrenaline. It’s often why you see huge dysfunction in the hyper successful, because the drive is so strong. It’s why an outsized proportion of UK Prime Ministers for example had lost a parent young.

There’s a danger in narrowly framing risking everything. As the material provides far less of a drive than the psychological. It’s also much scarier to put your whole self at risk.

Elon getting as far as away possible (Mars) from his possibly quite mad father, is perhaps a much stronger incentive/drive than making a few more billion.

As to whether it’s desirable, well that’s surely another question altogether.

Post reply on HN