CarlShulman comments on Outlawing Anthropics: An Updateless Dilemma - Less Wrong

26 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 08 September 2009 06:31PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (194)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Wei_Dai 09 September 2009 09:27:46PM 2 points [-]

The OB/LW/SL4/TOElist/polymathlist group is one intellectual community drawing on similar prior work that hasn't been broadly disseminated.

What prior work are you referring to, that hasn't been broadly disseminated?

The same arguments apply with much greater force to the the causal decision theory vs evidential decision theory debate.

I think much less brainpower has been spent on CDT vs EDT, since that's thought of as more of a technical issue that only professional decision theorists are interested in. Likewise, Newcomb's problem is usually seen as an intellectual curiosity of little practical use. (At least that's what I thought until I saw Eliezer's posts about the potential link between it and AI cooperation.)

Anthropic reasoning, on the other hand, is widely known and discussed (I remember the Doomsday Argument brought up during a casual lunch-time conversation at Microsoft), and thought to be both interesting in itself and having important applications in physics.

The interns wound up more focused on their group projects.

I miss the articles they would have written. :) Maybe post the topic ideas here and let others have a shot at them?

Comment author: CarlShulman 13 September 2009 04:28:08AM *  1 point [-]

"What prior work are you referring to, that hasn't been broadly disseminated?"

I'm thinking of the corpus of past posts on those lists, which bring certain tools and concepts (Solomonoff Induction, anthropic reasoning, Pearl, etc) jointly to readers' attention. When those tools are combined and focused on the same problem, different forum participants will tend to use them in similar ways.