= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Will_Sawin comments on Controlling Constant Programs - 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 (33)
Doesn't this fail Parfit's Hitchhiker?
You'd need to figure out a model first. To the extent Parfit's Hitchhiker is like a two-player game, the tools for figuring out what happens are very brittle and hard to work with. To the extent it's like Newcomb's problem, you can model it and get the right answer.
Actually I think it doesn't depend. Because you don't update on evidence, so you can't incorporate that into your proofs, so you don't get bad moral arguments.
I need a clearer explanation to understand what you are talking about.
Ok so the code goes like:
Use the appropriate decision theory to implement a function f from {picks you up, doesn't pick you up} and {world-programs} to {pay, don't pay}
Then set:
world-program:
If (f(picks you up, world-program)={pay}) then
else