= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
RickJS comments on Ingredients of Timeless Decision Theory - 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 (226)
Yes, I read about " ... disappears in a puff of smoke." I wasn't coming back for a measly $1K, I was coming back for another million! I'll see if they'll let me play again. Omega already KNOWS I'm greedy, this won't come as a shock. He'll probably have told his team what to say when I try it.
" ... and come back for more." was meant to be funny.
Anyway, this still doesn't answer my questions about "Omega has been correct on each of 100 observed occasions so far - everyone who took both boxes has found box B empty and received only a thousand dollars; everyone who took only box B has found B containing a million dollars."
Someone please answer my questions! Thanks!
The problem needs lots of little hypotheses about Omega. In general, you can create these hypotheses for yourself, using the principle of "Least Convenient Possible World"
http://lesswrong.com/lw/2k/the_least_convenient_possible_world/
Or, from philosophy/argumentation theory, "Principle of Charity".
http://philosophy.lander.edu/intro/charity.shtml
In your case, I think you need to add at least two helper assumptions - Omega's prediction abilities are trustworthy, and Omega's offer will never be repeated - not for you, not for anyone.