• Posts
  • RSS
  • ◂◂RSS
  • Contact

  • Rebrand Betting as a Guarantee

    December 12th, 2013
    betting, ideas  [html]
    A: I hear the Red Sox are playing the Yankees again.
    B: You "hear"? I keep talking about it!
    A: Well, yeah. Sorry! Who's going to win?
    B: The Sox, obviously. Though to be fair the bookies are giving them even odds.
    A: Want to bet on it?
    B: Sure. $10 that they win?
    A: If the Sox win, how will you feel?
    B: Awesome.
    A: And if they lose?
    B: Depressed.
    A: So shouldn't you be betting me $10 that they'll lose?
    B: Because then if they lose I'll at least have $10 and if they win I won't care about the $10, reducing my variance? That's logically correct, but it's also disloyal.
    A: What if I sell you a guarantee that the Sox win? Like insurance?
    B: Like I pay you $10 now, and if they lose you give me my money back? I'm not an idiot.
    A: No, you pay me $10 now, and if they lose I'll give you double your money back.
    B: Actually, that seems fair...

    To bet implies you think something is going to happen, and that by your internal estimate of probabilities you expect to come out ahead. So when people talk about insurance as betting it seems strange: flood insurance is a bet that my house will flood? Why would I bet that my house is going to flood? That would be terrible! With gurarantees and insurance, however, people can take exactly the same financial positions but view them differently:

    do nothing bet that Sox win bet that Sox lose buy guarantee that Sox win
    Sox win $0, happy +$10, happy -$10, happy -$10, happy
    Sox lose $0, sad -$10, sad +$10, sad +$10, sad
    There's no difference here between "bet that Sox lose" and "buy guarantee that Sox win" but at least to my non-sports-betting ear only the first sounds disloyal.

    Comment via: google plus, facebook

    Recent posts on blogs I like:

    The Gift of It's Your Problem Now

    Recently a security hole in a certain open source Java library resulted in a worldwide emergency kerfuffle as, say, 40% of the possibly hundreds of millions of worldwide deployments of this library needed to be updated in a hurry. (The other 60% also …

    via apenwarr January 1, 2022

    The container throttling problem

    This is an excerpt from an internal document David Mackey and I co-authored in April 2019. The document is excerpted since much of the original doc was about comparing possible approaches to increasing efficency at Twitter, which is mostly information tha…

    via Posts on December 18, 2021

    Experiences in raising children in shared housing

    Sometimes I see posts about people’s hope to raise children in a group housing situation, and it often seems overly optimistic to me. In particular they seem to expect that there will be more shared childcare than I think should be expected. Today I talke…

    via The whole sky October 18, 2021

    more     (via openring)


  • Posts
  • RSS
  • ◂◂RSS
  • Contact