Kingreaper comments on How can we compare decision theories? - Less Wrong

6 Post author: bentarm 18 August 2010 01:29PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (41)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Kingreaper 18 August 2010 02:18:40PM *  2 points [-]

What exactly do we mean by a "better" decision theory?

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.

Comment author: Perplexed 19 August 2010 12:04:19AM 2 points [-]

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