= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Alicorn comments on Revisiting torture vs. dust specks - 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 (64)
There is nothing you can do that makes it impossible that there will be torture. Therefore, every choice has a nonzero probability of being followed by torture. I'm not sure whether "leading to torture" is the best way to phrase this, though.
What he said. Also, if you are evaluating the rectitude of each possible choice by its consequences (i.e. using your utility function), it doesn't matter if you actually (might) cause the torture or if it just (possibly) occurs within your light cone - you have to count it.
Are you referring to me? I'm a she.
headdesk
What Alicorn said, yes. Damnit, I thought I was doing pretty good at avoiding the pronoun problems...
Don't worry about it. It was a safe bet, if you don't know who I am and this is the context you have to work with ;)
Hey, don't tell me what I'm not allowed to worry about! :P
(...geez, I feel like I'm about to be deleted as natter...)