Those posts are a large part of my reasoning on how well the typical player understands the relationship between odds and the prizes. A large percentage of players have almost no clue about what the odds are and what they really mean. It's simple math, but the numbers are too big to be really meaningful. You say that 1 in 75 milion is "much better" than 1 in 150 million, but your chances of winning with either is hardly different than if you don't even buy a ticket.
On one level I do believe that the odds are largely meaningless. There isnt any lottery anywhere that has a substantial payout and odds that give you a practical chance of winning. Giving away $5 million dollars simply can't be done without collecting far more than $5 million. All you can do is spend the dollar and hope you beat the odds, whatever they are. Raising the odds from 1 in 175 milion to 1 in 500 million would also raise the average jackpot to about 3 times it's current level. The jackpot fever that we've seen when lotteries advertise a jackpot of $300 to 350 million will look meaningless if they advertise a jackpot of $1 billion despite the steeper odds.
What I see from posters here isn't that they understand how unlikely they are to win based on the odds. I see posters saying they've been playing for years and seldom win more than a few bucks. That doesn't suggest a real grasp of the actual odds. It shows that people figure out that what's been happening for the last few years is probably a good indicator of what will continue to happen for as long as they play the lottery. For any lottery that pays out 20 to 30 cents on the dollar in small prizes and 20 to 30 as a jackpot, the typical player's results are going to be the same regardless of the odds. They'll occasionally win a modest prize while losing most of their money, and continue to hope that lightning strikes.