= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
thomblake comments on Multiple Choice - 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 (34)
(EDIT: rewrote crappy comment)
This article really doesn't seem to present anything that we don't already know. The main thrust seems to be something like "consider expected utility when taking actions", mixed in with some I don't know and the null action is an action. However, I believe that putting this general knowledge into a specific context adds value, in that it helps the reader examine parts of rationality in an applied context.
But it seems like it could have more links to related concepts. They're surely in there.
Allow me to be bewildered by the downvotes out loud, and request elaboration.
Edit: What I was curious about was why the downvoters disliked thomblake's comment, although I wouldn't mind knowing their objections to mine.
Well, why I would've downvoted that comment, is that it was basically just praise wrapped in word salad. I had a substantive point to make, but I failed to make it.