[pyrois]

Yes, I agree, I would take the risk, but those are two entirely different things. It's not the same argument framed in a different way at all.

In Yudkowsky's argument, it's the option between one person _absolutely guaranteed_ to have 50 years of torture, vs 3^^^3 people _absolutely guaranteed_ to be dust-moted. I think the guarantee changes things significantly.

[Houshalter]

If you consistently take low risks that might result in getting tortured, then you are pretty much guaranteed to eventually lose the bet and suffer. The probability of eventually losing even a small bet approaches 1 if you take it enough times.

Just think of it as if you were going to other people and deciding to take this bet for them. 1/3^^^3 chance of torture in exchange for removing a speck of dust from their eye. I think you would be ok with that because it's an obvious choice for ourselves.

And if you continue to do this for enough people, eventually one of them will get tortured. After removing dust specks from approximately 3^^^3 people's eye. But you are right, there is a chance no one will get tortured. So do it for 3^^^^3 people then and the probability is 0.99999...