Another way to look at the question is to examine it from the other perspective: if a stranger were likely to die would you inconvenience yourself to save them?

I think the answer would be Yes for everyone here. In practice there are a lot of people who will even place themselves at considerable risk to save a stranger's life (these people are often referred to as "firefighter", "policeman", etc).

Most of the disagreement in this thread stems from extremely different assessments of the risks imposed on others posed by loss of electricity for a few hours, and we're not all asking the same question.

I think the risk is low, though not zero, so I'm willing to view it as a "my life vs. significant inconvenience", and believe that there is a threshold where if my death was likely enough I'd inconvenience a lot of people even without asking (I'm not expecting a freebie and would expect to pay out a lot afterward).

Others view the risk as high and are essentially seeing an entirely different question "would you condemn another to save your life?" That's not the question anyone is answering when they say Yes.

Finally, if I ever face the question I doubt it will be a simply black & white issue. If I break that power line will someone die before it's repaired? I think it's unlikely (since they'd have died the last time the power went out) but there is a chance it might happen, just like there's a chance a rescuer dies any time you initiate SAR with your PLB.

(indeed you could always look at it that way: if a bridge washed out and your car went for a swim on a dark night and you managed to cling to a tree with your PLB ... would you trigger the PLB knowing that some sheriff's deputy was likely to also end up in the river? That there was a very real chance a SAR effort might result in a rescuer death?)