= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
wedrifid comments on Tallinn-Evans $125,000 Singularity Challenge - 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 (369)
Rational agents are not necessarily omniscient agents. There are cases where providing information to the market is a practical course of action.
Can't rational agents then mostly discount your information due to publication bias? In any case where providing information is not to your benefit, you would not provide it.
Discount but not discard. Others have their own agenda and if it were directly opposed to mine such that all our interactions were zero sum then I would ignore their communication. But in most cases there is some overlap in goals or at least compatibility. In such cases communication can be useful. Particularly when the information is verifiable. There will be publication bias but that is a bias not a completely invalidated signal.
In which case the nonprovision of that info is also information.
But it wouldn't at all resemble marketing as we know it, either way.
Although I now will treat all marketing as a specific instantiation of the clever arguer.
To amplify Eliezer's response: What Evidence Filtered Evidence? and comments thereon.