= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
timtyler comments on Desirable Dispositions and Rational Actions - 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 (180)
IMO, you haven't made a case for that - and few here agree with you.
If you really think randomness is an issue, imagine a deterministic program facing the problem, with no good source of randomness to hand.
No, randomness is kind of a red herring. I shouldn't have brought it up.
At one point I thought I had a kind of Dutch Book argument against Omega - if he could predict some future "random" event which I intended to use in conjunction with a mixed strategy, then I should be able to profit by making side bets "hedging" my choice with respect to Omega. But when I looked more carefully, it didn't work.
Yay: honesty points!