snarles comments on The Anthropic Trilemma - Less Wrong

24 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 27 September 2009 01:47AM

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

Comments (218)

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

Comment author: Nubulous 27 September 2009 07:43:10PM *  6 points [-]

When you wake up, you will almost certainly have won (a trillionth of the prize). The subsequent destruction of winners (sort of - see below) reduces your probability of being the surviving winner back to one in a billion.

Merging N people into 1 is the destruction of N-1 people - the process may be symmetrical but each of the N can only contribute 1/N of themself to the outcome.

The idea of being (N-1)/N th killed may seem a little odd at first, but less so if you compare it to the case where half of one person's brain is merged with half of a different person's (and the leftovers discarded).

EDIT: Note that when the trillion were told they won, they were actually being lied to - they had won a trillionth part of the prize, one way or another.

Comment author: snarles 20 May 2011 07:40:18PM *  1 point [-]

This.

How does Yudkosky's careless statement "Just as computer programs or brains can split, they ought to be able to merge" not immediately light up as the weakest link of the entire post?

If you think merging ought to work, then why not also think that quantum suicide ought to work?