LogFAQs > #910711692

darkknight109 posted...

If you could, your above stipulation on aging wouldn't apply because you're basically altering how the universe works at that point. You would just continually defy the odds of entropy and cease aging altogether. Since you've already acknowledged that's not the case, there have to be some reasonable limits on this power.

...and aging is a clear limit because there's no probability involved in aging. Luck requires *some* element of probability. Even if you were born with exceptional genes, you're going to age eventually.

darkknight109 posted...

I have no idea what you're saying with the back half of this sentence, but addressing the first part you're now arguing two different things. Above you argued that you would automatically be able to do anything to a high degree - program a fantastic video game, star in a blockbuster movie, etc. - and you would get by purely on luck. Now you're arguing that you would have to work at things.

Those can't both be true. It's impossible to "work at" something if luck already makes you automatically fantastically successful at it. I mean, if I magically made you a champion chess player, able to outplay anyone in the world and even outplay machines, how would you work at that skill? How would you possibly improve something that you're already (for all intents and purposes) perfect at?

No, both can be true. No matter what, you're putting at least some effort in. Luck just means that your effort will always achieve better results.

Granted, if we're talking about improving in ability then sure, there's not as much point in it other than a comfort threshold (ie, same results but luck carries less of the way so you feel better about it). However, in the case of something like chess, that'd have to rely exclusively on luck.

darkknight109 posted...

Yeah, but we're getting to select our own powers here - we're obviously going to be aware of it.

Oh, right, I was thinking in terms of a more general sense rather than the choosing part.

darkknight109 posted...

Look at it from a statistical point of view. Life expectancy in first world nations is roughly 80 years (give or take a couple years - US is 78, Canada is 82, UK is 81, etc.). That means, on any given day, you have a roughly 1 in 29200 chance - about 0.0034% - of dying to *something*. You don't need fantastic luck to beat those odds.

And the luckier you are, the longer you'd live. After all, I've known countless people over the years who didn't come close to hitting 78 before dying.

darkknight109 posted...

Dunno whether you're asking about population or physical size, but pretty small in both cases.

Both, really. Are talking private island where it's just a handful of people? Or is it a hundred people? A thousand people?
---

(\/)(\/)|-|
There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist.