Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> If you agree, then how can you say both act rationally?

Why should there be only 1 optimal way to play this game?

Example of a game with 2 optimal ways to play - tossing a coin and betting on head or tail.




Surely the optimal way to proceed when faced with betting on a coin toss is to keep your stake and guarantee you walk away with some money.

Now it may be possible to evaluate the utility of engaging in a start-up and so act rationally in entering in to such an endeavour but I'd warrant that's not how it [ever] happens. Instead it's far more realistic to assume it follows the lottery model: that people's sense of hope, or wishful thinking, makes them choose to play [at lottery, or startups] despite the analysis indicating an alternate choice is most logical. We humans are not creatures of logic.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: