Discover more from Overcoming Bias

This is a blog on why we believe and do what we do, why we pretend otherwise, how we might do better, and what our descendants might do, if they don't all die.

Over 13,000 subscribers

Words Vs. Bets

Robin Hanson

Sep 11, 2009

I once had a long discussion with Ken Steiglitz about P=NP, while I was still at Princeton. … Ken was and still is sure that P must not be equal to NP. Okay, I said to Ken, what are the odds that they are equal? Ken said that he thought the odds were a million to one. I immediately suggested a bet. I did not ask him to “bet his life,” but I did ask for a million to one bet. I would put up one dollar. If in say ten years P=NP had not been proved, then he would win my dollar. If P=NP was proved in that time frame, then I would win a million dollars from Ken. Ken said no way. After more discussion the best bet I could get out of Ken was to . Two to one. That was the best he would do.

That is from Richard Lipton; hat tip to Michael Nielsen. Does anyone doubt that two to one better summarizes his evidence than a million to one?

34 Comments

Overcoming Bias Commenter

May 15

Ian Maxwell, I would be happy to bet my $100 against your $10k that PvNP is shown to be undecidable by Peano arithmetic within the next 20 years. If you cap your losses at $100, it doesn't look to me worth the transaction costs to collect 20 years in the future, so I won't put up my $1. Similarly, I don't think my first offer gives you any upside.

Expand full comment

Thanks - great story!

I'll take your bet at, hmm, 20 to 1. Up for it?Anyone else want to post the odds they'd take the bet at?

32 more comments...