= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
benelliott comments on Rationalists don't care about the future - 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 (143)
Elsewhere in this thread, you have criticised hyperbolic discounting for being 'irrational', by which I presume you mean the fact that is inconsistent under reflection, while exponentials are not.
Your new function is also inconsistent under reflection.
Maybe this is an argument for not discounting, since that is the only possible way to have a past-future symmetric, reflexively consistent utility function.
Just a thought.
Not really - this is the problem.
We are referring to the same fact. Reflective inconsistency is a trivial consequence of dynamic inconsistency.