Parfit's Hitchhiker: You're stranded in the desert and Omega comes up. It will give you a ride out of the desert iff it predicts you'd give it 10,000 dollars upon reaching civilization again. You get a ride. When in civilization again, do you go over to the bank and withdraw some money? Well, policies which pay up in this specific situation get (value of a life - 10,000 dollars) more than policies which don't pay in this specific situation, which just die.

Why is this called Parfit's Hitchhiker? Who is the Parfit it is referring to? Where was this scenario first written up? (I'm trying to dig up the original reference.)

Not for Mormons. They don't believe in an omnipresent God.

Well, what are your actual steps? Or is this just advertisement?

Do you still live in Utah?

Did your family cut you off?

Do you know about [r/exmormon](https://old.reddit.com/r/exmormon/)?

Maybe try controlling for age? I think young people are both less likely to have signed up for cryonics (because they have less money and are less likely to die) and also have higher probabilities of cryonics working for them (because cryonics will improve by the time they need it).

This graph seems to match the rise of the internet. Here's my alternate hypothesis: Most people are irrational, and now it's more reasonable to call them crazy/stupid/fools because they have much greater access to knowledge that they are refusing/unable to learn from. I think people are just about as empathetic as they used to be, but incorrect people are less reasonable in their beliefs.

$$\frac{P(H\mid DX)}{P(\overline{H}\mid DX)}=\frac{\frac{P(D\mid HX)P(H\mid X)}{P(D\mid X)}}{\frac{P(D\mid \overline{H}X)P(\overline{H}H\mid X)}{P(D\mid X)}}$$$$O(H\mid DX)=O(H\mid X)\frac{P(D\mid HX)}{P(D\mid \overline{H}X)}$$

The trick here is that both equations contain $P(D\mid H)$ which is the hardest to calculate, and that number drops out when we divide the equations.

You have a couple typos here. The first centered equation should not have a $P(\bar H H | X)$ but instead have $P(\bar H | X)$, and the inline expression should be $P(D | X)$, not $P(D | H)$.

A few things to note:

1. GPT-4's release was delayed by ~8 months because they wanted to do safety testing before releasing it. If you take this into account your graph looks much less steep.
2. The employees at OpenAI know about prediction markets.
3. They also have incentives to manipulate them to look like GPT-5 will come out later than it actually will. They don't want to set off an AI arms race.

I think most people view "All people are equal" as a pronouncement of a moral belief they hold, not as a statement of fact. When they say, "All people are equal", they mean they believe "all people should be treated equally", or "everyone should have to obey the same laws" or "everyone's needs have equal importance".

This moral pronouncement is also consistent with a utilitarian pronouncing "All people are equal to me", as in that all people's lives hold equal weight in his utility function.