# The Extinction Dilemma

post by DragonGod · 2017-12-16T13:52:37.355Z · LW · GW · 1 commentsInspiration came from Against the Linear Utility Hypothesis and the Leverage Penalty

Place a value on the utility of a utopia with 1 human, let's call this X.

Place a value on the negutility of all of humanity going extinct. Let's call this Z.

Decide if your utility function is linear in number of lives saved.

Place a value on the utility of say humans achieving a perfect utopia. Call this K.

Omega offers you a bet. This bet has a 50% chance of humanity reaching a Kardashev type V civilisation (colonising the multiverse) and a perfect utopia, and a 50% chance of human extinction this instant.

Omega is an omnipotent entity that always tells the truth, you know (and believe this), etc.

Do you accept the bet?

What about 1:3 odds?

What about 3:1 odds?

What is the highest probability of extinction at which you would accept Omega's offer?

What does this say about your utility function?

## 1 comments

Comments sorted by top scores.

## comment by DragonGod · 2017-12-17T01:30:36.524Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

T**here is no finite number of lives that reach utopia, for which I would accept Omega's bet at a 90% chance of extinction. **

This does not mean I would accept Omega's bet at 89% chance of extinction (I wouldn't), but 90% is far above my ceiling, and I'm very sure of it.