cousin_it comments on Revisiting torture vs. dust specks - Less Wrong

5 [deleted] 08 July 2009 11:04AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (64)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: cousin_it 09 July 2009 02:56:57PM *  0 points [-]

The proximity effect, as described in the post, makes your "derandomizing" step invalid.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 09 July 2009 03:06:01PM *  0 points [-]

It can't be invalid: just replace the initial rule by this: of all 3^^^3, a random selection of 1000 will be made who are to be tortured. Given this rule, each individual has about 1 in 3^^^3/1000 probability of getting selected for torture, which is presumably even better deal than a certain speck. This is compared to choosing one person to torture with certainty. The proximity effect may say that those 1000 people are from far away and so of little importance, which I mentioned in the comment above. I don't think the choice of saving one known person over a thousand ridiculously-far-away people is necessarily incorrect though.

Comment author: cousin_it 09 July 2009 04:35:00PM 0 points [-]

Yes, this way is correct. I thought you implied the 1000 people were close, not far away.