= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
JamesAndrix 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)
Ok, I've read the paper(most of it) and Wei-Dai's article now. Two points.
In a sense, I understand how you might think that the Absent Minded Driver is no less contrived and unrealistic than Newcomb's Paradox. Maybe different people have different intuitions as to what toy examples are informative and which are misleading. Someone else (on this thread?) responded to me recently with the example of frictionless pulleys and the like from physics. All I can tell you is that my intuition tells me that the AMD, the PD, frictionless pulleys,and even Parfit's Hitchhiker all strike me as admirable teaching tools, whereas Newcomb problems and the old questions of irrestable force vs immovable object in physics are simply wrong problems which can only create confusion.
Reading Wei-Dai's snarking about how the LW approach to decision theory (with zero published papers to date) is so superior to the confusion in which mere misguided Nobel laureates struggle - well, I almost threw up. It is extremely doubtful that I will continue posting here for long.
1A. It may well be a wrong problem. if so it ought to be dissolved.
1B. If so, many theorists (including presumably nobel prize winners), have missed it since 1969.
1C. Your intuition should not be considered a persuasive argument, even by you.
2 . Even ignoring any singularitarian predictions, given the degree to which knowledge acceleration has already advanced, you should expect to see cases where old standards are blown away with seemingly little effort.
Maybe this isn't one of those cases, but it should not surprise you if we learn that humanity as a whole has done more decision theory in the past few years than in all previous history.
Given that the similar accelerations are happening in many fields, there are probably several past-nobel-level advances by rank amateurs with no special genius.