I've never given much thought to the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics (because I don't know enough about quantum mechanics to think about such things). But a famous economist asks why, if there are infinite possible worlds, he didn't end up on a better one.
Which got me to thinking. Assuming infinite or at least a great many worlds which presumably vary in some measurable dimension of good/bad places to live, they could be plotted on a normal distribution. The odds are, then, that our world would be near the mean, within one standard deviation from it.
But what if we were in the bottom tail of the distribution. That would be really bad luck. Most worlds would be better, but we hit stuck with one of the worst ones.
But it might be even more depressing if we're in the upper tail of the distribution. That would mean that of all possible worlds, the great majority - so the great majority of all sentient life - was worse off than us.