= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
John_Maxwell_IV comments on Should I believe what the SIAI claims? - 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 (600)
It doesn't sound to me as though you're maximizing expected utility. If you were maximizing expected utility, you would put all of your eggs in the most promising basket.
Or perhaps you are maximizing expected utility, but your utility function is equal to the number of digits in some number representing the amount of good you've done for the world. This is a pretty selfish/egotistical utility function to have, and it might be mine as well, but if you have it it's better to be honest and admit it. We're hardly the only ones:
http://www.slate.com/id/2034
I'm having trouble reading this in a way that is not inconsistent, specifically the tension between "good" and "utility function". Any help?
"good" means increasing the utility functions of others.
More precise: "Perhaps you are maximizing expected utility, but your utility function is equal to some logarithm of some number representing the amount you've increased values assumed by the utility functions of others."
Aha. That wasn't even one of my guesses. Thanks!