= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
whpearson comments on Open Thread: December 2009 - 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 (263)
Are people interested in discussing bounded memory rationality? I see a fair number of people talking about solomonov type systems, but not much about what a finite system should do.
Sure. What about it in particular? Care to post some insights?
Would my other reply to you be an interesting/valid way of thinking about the problem. If not what were you looking for?
Pardon me. Missed the reply. Yes, I'd certainly engage with that subject if you fleshed it out a bit.
I was thinking about starting with very simple agents. Things like 1 input, 1 output with 1 bit of memory and looking at them from a decision theory point of view. Asking questions like "Would we view it as having a goal/decision theory?" If not what is the minimal agent that we would and does it make any trade offs for having a decision theory module in terms of the complexity of the function it can represent.
I tend to let other people draw those lines up. It just seems like defining words and doesn't tend to spark my interest.
I would be interested to see where you went with your answer to that one.