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

51–60 of 142 posts

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#51

Post by TrackerFF »

dist1ll wrote: post #38
Jensson wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Unsurprisingly, it is easy to lose your spouse, children, etc. if you're at the point where you've already lost all your money. Because very likely, you've also lost their money in the process. I've seen people lose their family and friends, too.

People take out mortgages, credit card loans, loan money from friends, family, colleagues. Are intentionally opaque about their financial situation.

Then if things go bust, and people want their money back, they're stuck alone with the mess.

At its core, it's due to breach of trust.

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#52

Post by misja111 »

nme01 wrote: post #12

I see a problem with risking everything that is if your goal is to either make it to the top or make it to the bottom, then risking it all is the way to go. Yet, that’s a poor long-term strategy. Eventually risk will realize and you’ll lose it all.

But eventually every one of use will lose it all; we are all mortals. So shouldn't we try to maximize happiness while we are alive? Risking it all could make sense if it leads to lots of happiness if it works out. It reminds me of the saying, 'better to live one year as a lion than ten years as a sheep'

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#53

Post by Jensson »

dist1ll wrote: post #38
Jensson wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What kind of business would benefit from you betting your children on it? Sure you can easily burn all of those by working too much, but that is a trade and not a bet.

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#54

Post by rramadass »

weregiraffe wrote: post #33
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?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32561740

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#55

Post by oarabbus_ »

kqr wrote: post #34
oarabbus_ wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>(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 fini…

>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,

Weighing probabilities is one thing, and assumes humans are capable of rationally weighing these outcomes (which isn't clear) but even then which part of our scientific understanding of death precludes death having negative infinite utility?

Still, this doesn't disprove death as negative infinite utility, as the risk of death also exists from _not_ crossing the street; one isn't preventing the risk of death by refusing to cross the street. In fact, staying permanently in one place, never crossing the street, and doing nothing indefinitely out of a fear of death, would simply guarantee one's death.

>and the desirable outcome to have finite positive utility

Extend the timescale and the desirable outcome leads to the same outcome as the "undesirable" one.

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#59

Post by Semiapies »

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.

Really, I wonder if it happened at all.

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#60

Post by xvector »

misja111 wrote: post #52
nme01 wrote: post #12

I see a problem with risking everything that is if your goal is to either make it to the top or make it to the bottom, then risking it all is the way to go. Yet, that’s a poor long-term strategy. Eventually risk will realize and you’ll lose it all.

But eventually every one of use will lose it all; we are all mortals. So shouldn't we try to maximize happiness while we are alive? Risking it all could make sense if it leads to lots of happiness if it works out. It reminds me of the saying, 'better to live one year as a lion than ten years as a sheep'

Is it? Sheep can live pretty chill and content lives. I'd take ten as a sheep over one as a lion.
Post reply on HN