= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
SforSingularity comments on You have just been Counterfactually Mugged! - 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 (22)
Expected reputational damage is probably $a few hundred IMO. It could be picked up and used as ammunition against SIAI.
Few will care about a silly comment on one post, especially given the context. Anybody using it as ammunition will look really petty.
Better ammunition:"But when Eliezer was counterfactually mugged, he didn't pay. How serious is he on his decision theory?"
Even if the procedural problems here give him a good reason not to 'pay', paying is better rhetorically. (though he may clarify that he won't pay under similarly sloppy conditions again.)
But that isn't supposed to be part of the Counterfactual Mugging scenario! Anyone would pay then.
I disagree. I think it could be used very effectively without explanation alongside a more serious criticism, possibly with a permalink to the actual comment.
it would all be more clear-cut if the amounts involved were a few hundred $. But yes, good point.