Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ALittleLight 1920 days ago
That's exactly the fallacy I was describing. Whether or not you can afford to lose money is completely independent of how much your initial investments cost. You will tend to make more money, provided you have some ability to predict, if you do what you predict is best based on the present and the future, compared to changing your decisions based on the origins of your money.
1 comments
perl4ever 1918 days ago 

  A = Bob has $1M in bitcoin.
  B = Bob can afford to lose $1M.
It appears to me you think P(B) = P(B|A). I think obviously P(B) < P(B|A).

How about:

  A = Bob has $1M in bitcoin which he paid $100 for.
  B = Bob has $1M in bitcoin which he paid $1M for.
  C = Bob can afford to lose $1M.
It appears to me you believe P(C|A) = P(C|B) = P(C). I'd expect P(C|A) > P(C|B).
link