jsteinhardt comments on Folk grammar and morality - Less Wrong

20 Post author: Emile 17 December 2010 09:20PM

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

Comments (61)

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

Comment author: jsteinhardt 18 December 2010 02:10:29AM *  1 point [-]

My intuition says that CEV is unlikely to consist of vast rulesets. As you yourself stated, if you take a look at the most successful learning algorithms today, they all use some form of statistical approach (sometimes Bayes, sometimes something else).

EDIT: For some reason "statistical approach" leaves a bad taste in some people's mouths. If you are one of these people, I'd be happy to know why so that I can either update my beliefs or figure out how to explain why the statistical approach is good.

Comment author: GuySrinivasan 18 December 2010 02:20:59AM 3 points [-]

I've always chalked it up to the fact that you can get decent results with a model that doesn't even pretend to try to correspond to reality and which is thus not robust to things like counterfactuals. Great results on exactly the domain you programmed for is just asking someone to accidentally apply it to a different domain...

I don't know if this is the actual reason.

Comment author: jsteinhardt 18 December 2010 04:41:52AM 0 points [-]

Thanks. I think the reason I don't find this compelling is that I see statistical methods being applied to increasingly general problems; I also see the same general ideas being applied to solve problems in many different domains (after, of course, specializing the ideas to the domain in question). It seems to me that if we continue on this path, the limit is being able to solve fully general problems. But this seems closer to an intuition than something I can actually convince anyone of.

Comment author: Alexandros 18 December 2010 08:44:07AM 1 point [-]

It feels like statistical methods are just giving up on getting it 'absolutely right' in favour of getting it 'good enough', and for morality, that just doesn't seem satisfactory. Maybe I'm underestimating statistical systems? I'd love to be corrected.