= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Kingreaper comments on How can we compare decision theories? - 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 (41)
If you want to make every decision theory fall into the trap, other than the most arbitrary and insane, simply have the S2 basis be:
If, during scenario 1, you recited the square ordinality primes (ie. 1st prime, 4th prime, 9th prime, etc.) up to the 100th prime, the envelope will contain $1 billion
One which comes up with the optimal result on average, given the available information, even if (in some strands of reality) it fails to give the optimal result due to being in a particular scenario that it's user was unaware of
ie. the best decision theory would still fail to get the best result for the "simulate you in an unrelated scenario and base your reward on something completely irrelevant"
It would also fail to get the best result in the "you can have a 20% chance of winning 2 million utilons OR an 80% chance of winning 0.2 utilons" if the 20% chance failed to come up, and the 80% chance did.
Regarding your final paragraph, game theorist would point out that with efficient insurance markets, and for a small fee, you would be able to cash-in that lottery-ticket in exchange for a surefire 400,000.16 utilons