Eugine_Nier comments on Punishing future crimes - Less Wrong

3 Post author: Bongo 28 January 2011 09:00PM

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

Comments (63)

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

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 29 January 2011 05:37:10AM 1 point [-]

I would just note that "having a single time-traveler pre-punish one crime is worth some fraction of that utility" doesn't really seem to fit this system, since a single pre-punishment falls well under the 'random noise' threshold so its deterrence effect is effectively zero.

There is no sharp "random noise threshold". A single act has some positive probability of increasing the amount of belief someone assigns to the proposition "crime doesn't pay". Rather the expected value of the change is positive.

(This isn't really a factual disagreement, it just depends on how you interpret "fraction of utility" in a context where one act is useless but, say, a thousand are useful; is the single act's utility zero or k/1000? Personally, I straight-up refuse to treat utility as a scalar quantity.)

That's why I called this an acausal coordination problem.