Hacker News Reader

A similar but not quite the same mechanic is fuel economy.

Let's say you have two vehicles, both doing 10,000 miles per year. One gets 10 mpg and the other 50.

Would you rather upgrade the 10 mpg vehicle to 13 mpg, or the 50 mpg to 100 mpg?

Not only should you pick the former - you should pick the former even if you could upgrade the 50 mpg vehicle to run on nothing.

View on HN

Yes, the fuel savings in the former case are larger than the initial fuel consumption in the latter case, but is it really unintuitive in practice? What I mean is that we generally pay for fuel per volume, not per mileage. Now, I am not sure about others, but I would always base my decision based on the money I'd save over a period of time, which in this case would require considering each vehicle's actual fuel consumption over that period of time.

It is the assumption that the two cars always make the same number od miles indepedently od the cost that is unusual and unintuitive.

If you think of it as a family that keeps obstinately driving both cars the same amount despite massive cost differences its weird but you could think of it as a mixed fleet of delivery or work trucks that are all needed regardless, the question is how you manage or prioritize upgrading them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com