= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Christian_Szegedy comments on Misleading the witness - 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 (112)
If you would trade a .99999 probability of $100M for a .99997 probability of $100B, then you're correct - you have no consistent utility function, and hence you can be money-pumped by the Allais Paradox.
The above example had no consistent (real valued) utility function regardless off my 100M@.99999 vs. 100B@.99997 preference.
BTW, whatever would that preference be (I am a bit unsure, but I think I'd still take the 100M as not doing so would triple my chances of losing it) I did not really get the conclusion of the essay. At least I could not follow why being money-pumped (according to that definition of "money pumped") is so undesirable from any rational point of view.