Distinguish pro tanto vs all-things-considered (or ānetā) high stakes. The statement is literally true of pro tanto high stakes: the 1% chance of extremely high stakes is by itself, as far as it goes, an expected high stake. But itās possible that this high stake might be outweighed or cancelled out by other sufficiently high stakes among the remaining probability space (hence the subsequent parenthetical about āunless one inverts the high stakes in a way that cancels out...ā).
The general lesson of my post is that saying āthereās a 99% chance thereās nothing to see hereā has surprisingly little influence on the overall expected value. You canāt show the expected stakes are low by showing that itās extremely likely that the actual stakes are low. You have to focus on the higher-stakes portions of probability space, even if small (but non-negligible).
Distinguish pro tanto vs all-things-considered (or ānetā) high stakes. The statement is literally true of pro tanto high stakes: the 1% chance of extremely high stakes is by itself, as far as it goes, an expected high stake. But itās possible that this high stake might be outweighed or cancelled out by other sufficiently high stakes among the remaining probability space (hence the subsequent parenthetical about āunless one inverts the high stakes in a way that cancels out...ā).
The general lesson of my post is that saying āthereās a 99% chance thereās nothing to see hereā has surprisingly little influence on the overall expected value. You canāt show the expected stakes are low by showing that itās extremely likely that the actual stakes are low. You have to focus on the higher-stakes portions of probability space, even if small (but non-negligible).