= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
PhilGoetz comments on indexical uncertainty and the Axiom of Independence - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (70)
A = pressing a button gives you $100
B = pressing a button gives you $1000 (if it's still in the box)
C = pressing a button exterminates the $1000 from B, and this happens before B.
B>A, but p*B+(1-p)*C<p*A+(1-p)*C for (1-p) big enough, where p represents your uncertainty of whether your are pressing the button to get $1000/$100 or to exterminate $1000. The lotteries are dependent now, which obviously breaks the principle.
Where's the indexical uncertainty in this example? You're talking about temporal uncertainty.
You aren't describing different world states. You're describing different timelines. C is temporally tangled with B.
If you express your timelines in a suitable temporal logic, and then let us choose between timelines, I expect the problem will go away.
If the worlds are 4D crystals of timelines, two agents placed at different times are not much different from two agents placed in the same time-slice.
You can't expect to use a model that's based on state transitions to work when you switch to a timeless model.
If the worlds are 4D crystals, there is no time, no decisions, and no expectation; so what does "optimization" even mean? Pick the best single timeline? Whose problem does that solve?
I'd love to stay and discuss this with you, but since all you do is karma-slap me without explanation whenever I open my mouth - bye!
Theres still subjective uncertainty in 4D crystals.