My opinion is that insurance is vastly misunderstood, just as gambling is vastly misunderstood. In insurance, it's the low premiums on high valued assets that obscure peoples thinking and in gambling it's often small wagers offered in return for potentially large payoffs. I know of people who could afford to replace a phone if it was stolen, but still take insurance on it because the small premium on the insurance seems like a good deal. There is just no way that these type of insurance contracts have a positive expected value to the individual. However, if you're a single Mom making ends meet, who needs to drop her kids at school every morning, please insure your car. The utility of losing the car and not being able to get to work etc. is just too negative.
Yip, exactly this. The CFR algorithm they speak of is based on finding a nash equilibrium for each strategy-pair in the game tree. Something that I think can only be computed for 2 players, and no more.
"There are no universal truths for human happiness and behaviour." That's pretty bold statement. We know that there are universal truths to human suffering, and the behavior that can lead to suffering. We see it all the time depicted on the news, or we all experience it at one point or another. Why do you say the same is not true of happiness?
As an exercise pitted against the anecdote you gave of A.J Jacobs trying to live an authentic life, try this: pretend to be everything you wish yourself to be. Wear those qualities with as much confidence you can muster and then go out into the world and build relationships; wear this new persona that you have created when you start you start a relationship with someone, pretend to show all the qualities you wish you possess the next time you get interviewed for a job, etc.. Then watch yourself and see how it feels to carry the burden of having to constantly pretend to be something that you only wish your self to be. Doesn't sound very enjoyable if you ask me.
No one seems to be discussing this, but is Travis personally responsible for the loss of the drivers 97k? The driver sure thinks he is. Perhaps he played some roll in it. But the driver certainly made the decision to take out that loan. And I guess the driver had enough sense at the time to understand the risks involved with credit when he took out the loan. Well then you might say it's not the most compassionate thing to say to someone who clearly is suffering from financial loss. But I think it only seems like a mean thing to say because it's true. And it's really these truths that people don't want to accept about themselves. That they themselves are responsible for their own suffering.
Of the few success stories listed they mention Camden Brewery getting bought for double the amount that online investors put in.. So the online investors got double their money as a payout? If that is the case I don't even know how that count as a success. If investors knew at the time the potential payouts were something like 2:1 they should have stay well clear of that bet.
Just wanted to add some feedback on the design of your site. The typography needs some work. The serif typeface you have used in your tagline and the sans-serif typeface used in your logo don't compliment it each other. If you just want to keep things simple try keep the two in the same family and then play with contrast between the two using weight and size. I understand you've used a typeface for your logo that you may not be able to use for the tagline. In that case look to use something sans-serif and geometric/square to compliment the logo. That leads me to the lack of content explaining what exactly I am looking at. You need to provide more information on the page. The design should be a roadmap of my attention; catch my attention at the logo and the tagline, let that then flow to a brief description and then finally the app-store button. My eyes should move through the page in that order. Currently the size of the app store link and the size and position of the seat geek logo are too large/distracting and compete for my attention.
Those cases are not the same. Here you have individuals spending money because they find the idea of their money being wasted in such a fashion entertaining. It's waste for the sake of waste. This is exactly why this is the perfect stunt for CAH.
One estimate I heard on the required size of a donation able to save one life was around $4k. So yeah right now the collective have given enough money to save 20 lives into digging a massive hole in the ground.