John_Maxwell_IV comments on Bayesians vs. Barbarians - Less Wrong

51 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 14 April 2009 11:45PM

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

Comments (270)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: John_Maxwell_IV 15 April 2009 11:48:07PM 0 points [-]

You didn't mention in the Newcomb's Problem article that you're a one-boxer.

As a die-hard two-boxer, perhaps someone can explain one-boxing to me. Let's say that Box A contains money to save 3 lives (if Omega thinks you'll take it only) or nothing, and Box B contains money to save 2 lives. Conditional on this being the only game Omega will ever play with you, why the hell would you take Box A only?

I suspect what all you one-boxers are doing is that you somehow believe that a scenario like this one will actually occur, and you're trying to broadcast your intent to one-box so Omega will put money in for you.

Comment author: Larks 04 August 2009 12:47:50PM 1 point [-]

Imagine Omega's predictions have a 99.9% success rate, and then work out the expected gain for one-boxers vs two-boxers.

By stepping back from the issue and ignoring the 'can't change the contents now' issue, you can see that one-boxers do much better than two-boxers, so as we want to maximise our expected payoff, we should become one-boxers.

Not sure if I find this convincing.

Comment author: John_Maxwell_IV 05 August 2009 05:21:00PM 5 points [-]

I posted that comment four or five months ago. I'm a one-boxer now, haha. Figure that you can either choose to always one-box or choose to pretend like you're going to one-box but actually two-box. Omega is assumed to be able to tell the difference, so the first option makes more sense.

Comment author: William 16 April 2009 08:53:12PM 0 points [-]

I can choose through the composition of my mind to save 3 lives by wanting to refuse to take the money to save 2 lives. Or I can choose to save the two lives and thus not get 3 lives. Why the hell would I take both boxes?

Comment author: John_Maxwell_IV 17 April 2009 05:19:49PM 0 points [-]

I guess that makes sense. If you have the option of choosing what the composition of your mind is.

Comment author: William 19 April 2009 03:27:44AM 0 points [-]

"Composition of my mind" is a bad phrase for it, but what I mean is that I have a collection of neurons that say "I'm a one-boxer" or similar.

Comment author: PhilGoetz 16 April 2009 03:25:18AM 0 points [-]

You can find several long discussions of this on Overcoming Bias, and in earlier posts on Less Wrong.