Hacker News Reader

> Why is that? The odds of being right are 50-50, so why not switch?

Couldn't you ask the opposite question: if the odds are 50-50, why switch? Keeping your initial choice is more passive than switching. If the odds of success are the same, shouldn't the choice with the least energy expenditure be preferred?

View on HN

The second experiment seems wrong.

> But now, if you switch and are correct, you win $6.

Everyone I know, would switch. It's a linear optimization.

I wonder if the results would be significantly different if you started at $6/$5. Feels like the 'pointless' offer might prime people to refuse.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com