Eugine_Nier comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 5 - Less Wrong

6 Post author: NihilCredo 02 November 2010 06:57PM

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

Comments (648)

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

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 26 November 2010 04:34:45PM 1 point [-]

If I assume that changes to SP are retroactive but that changes to p and EB aren't... for example, if I assume that if today I increase my ability to catch criminals (say, by implementing superior DNA scanning), this only affects criminals who commit crimes today or later, not criminals who committed a crime last year... then I agree with you.

Well, retroactive changes to p tend to be much smaller since most evidence degrades with time.

Also in this case since the crime is attempting violent overthrow of the government retroactive changes in p are almost non-existent, after all a successful overthrow by its nature virtually eliminates your chances of getting punished for it.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 26 November 2010 11:29:26PM 1 point [-]

Well, retroactive changes to p tend to be much smaller since most evidence degrades with time.

That's a fair point. So, yes: if p is effectively constant and SP is not, you're right that that's a good reason to keep applying the old SP to old prisoners. I stand corrected.

Also in this case since the crime is attempting violent overthrow of the government retroactive changes in p are almost non-existent, after all a successful overthrow by its nature virtually eliminates your chances of getting punished for it.

So are you saying the SP-setting strategy you're proposing doesn't apply to crimes that don't destabilize the criminal justice system itself?

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 28 November 2010 12:53:37AM 1 point [-]

So are you saying the SP-setting strategy you're proposing doesn't apply to crimes that don't destabilize the criminal justice system itself?

I'm saying what I said and hopefully what's true, redo the calculations yourself if you like. Here I'm saying that if a crime has the potential to destabilize the criminal justice system itself, that should be taken into account when calculating p.