Vladimir_Nesov comments on The Blackmail Equation - Less Wrong

13 Post author: Stuart_Armstrong 10 March 2010 02:46PM

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

Comments (87)

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

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 10 March 2010 09:19:12PM 1 point [-]

If the countess is wise she will not pay in such a situation, the baron will know this and he will choose not to modify his source code. But it is a choise, the universe permits it.

Now this is a game of signalling -- to lie or not to lie, to trust or not to trust (or just how to interpret a given signal). The payoffs of the original game induce the payoff for this game of signalling the facts useful for efficiently playing the original game.

You don't neet to talk about "modified source code" to discuss this data as signalling the original source code. (The original source code is interesting, because it describes the strategy.) The modified code is only interesting to the extent it signals the original code (which it probably doesn't).

(Incidentally, one can only change things in accordance with the laws of physics, and many-to-one mapping may not be an option, though reconstructing the past may be infeasible in practice.)

Comment author: wedrifid 10 March 2010 09:30:25PM 1 point [-]

to lie or not to lie, to trust or not to trust

But it isn't a lie. It is the truth.

You don't neet to talk about "modified source code" to discuss this data as signalling the original source code.

I don't want to signal the original source code.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 10 March 2010 09:47:31PM 0 points [-]

I don't want to signal the original source code.

But I want to know it, so whatever you do, signals something about the original source code, possibly very little.

But it isn't a lie. It is the truth.

What's not a lie? (I'm confused.) I was just listing the possible moves in a new meta-game.