prase comments on Preference utilitarian measure of historical welfare - Less Wrong

7 Post author: taw 14 April 2010 01:32PM

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

Comments (25)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: prase 15 April 2010 03:28:22PM 4 points [-]

Neolithic Middle East (5000 BCE) - 1.6, Paleolithic anywhere (20000 BCE) - 0

Why do you prefer neolithic Middle East to the paleolithic? The advent of agriculture probably decreased the life expectancy, and I don't see anything which could compensate it in early agricultural societies. Put another way, I would strongly prefer a dangerous, but at least a bit adventurous life of a hunter-gatherer to the slavish work of a primitive peasant.

Comment author: taw 16 April 2010 10:20:32PM 1 point [-]

Agriculture, city life, and large scale trade networks arose together, and I prefer this higher population and culture density and lower risk of violent death to Paleolithic somewhat higher quality of food.

Comment author: Academian 18 April 2010 10:32:38PM 1 point [-]

Hey taw, did you write a code to present yourself with lotteries, log your choices, and compute your utilities?

Comment author: taw 19 April 2010 11:00:26AM 0 points [-]

I ordered the choices until I was happy about them (that part wasn't too difficult as they're mostly chronological). Then I did "if I was about to live in nth, and there was a time machine that with p% moved me to n+1th, and otherwise to n-1th era, what would p need to be for me to take it" kind of lottery thinking.

Conversion of these to utilities was done by Ruby code in the post.