Cyan comments on Applying utility functions to humans considered harmful - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (114)
There's already a word for that: "optimand". The latter is the better terminology because (i) science-y types familiar with the "-and" suffix will instantly understand it and (ii) it's not in a name collision with another concept.
If "utility" is just terminology for "that which is optimized", then
is vacuous: goal-directed agents attempt to optimize something by definition.
Right - but you can't say "expected optimand maximiser". There is a loooong history of using the term "utility" in this context in economics. Think you have better terminology? Go for it - but so far, I don't see much of a case.
That would be the "other concept" (link edited to point to specific subsection of linked article) referred to in the grandparent.
Not "vacuous" - true. We have people saying that utility-based frameworks are "harmful". That needs correcting, is all.
I suspect that by "utility-based frameworks" they mean something more specific than you do.
Maybe - but if suspicions are all you have, then someone is not being clear - and I don't think it is me.
I find it hilarious that you think you're being perfectly clear and yet cannot be bothered to employ standard terminology.