= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
whpearson comments on Decision theory: Why Pearl helps reduce “could” and “would”, but still leaves us with at least three alternatives - 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
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Comments (70)
My problem with these formalisms is that they don't apply to real world problems. In that real world problems you can alter the network as well as altering the nodes.
For example you could have an innards altering program that could make innards that attempt to look at omega's innards and make a decision on whether to one-box or not based on that. This would form a loop in the network, what it would do to the correct strategy, I don't know.
In the real world this would not be able to be stopped. Sure you can say that it doesn't apply to the thought experiment but then you are divorcing the thought experiment from reality.