jsteinhardt comments on Model Uncertainty, Pascalian Reasoning and Utilitarianism - Less Wrong

23 Post author: multifoliaterose 14 June 2011 03:19AM

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

Comments (154)

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

Comment author: jsteinhardt 15 June 2011 07:30:18PM 2 points [-]

If by value you mean "place utility on" then that doesn't follow. As I said, utility has to do (among many other things) with risk aversion. You could be willing to pay twice as many dollars for twice as many DALYs and yet not place twice as much utility on twice as many DALYs. Assuming that 1 DALY = 1 utilon, then the utility of x DALYs is by definition 1/p, where p is the probability at which you would pay exactly 1 DALY to get x DALYs with probability p.

Again, having all DALYs be equally valuable doesn't mean that your utility function scales linearly with DALYs, you could have a utility function that is say sqrt(# DALYs) and this would still value all DALYs equally. Although also see Will_Newsome's comments elsewhere about why talking about things in terms of utility is probably not the best idea anyways.

If by utility you meant something other than VNM utility, then I apologize for the confusion (although as I pointed out elsewhere, I would then take objection to claims that you should maximize its expected value).

Comment author: Normal_Anomaly 16 June 2011 01:10:55AM 0 points [-]

I'm afraid my past few comments have been confused. I don't know as much about my utility function as I wish I did. I think I am allowed to assign positive utility to a change in my utility function, and if so then I want my utility function to be linear in DALYs. It probably is not so already.

Comment author: jsteinhardt 16 June 2011 06:55:54PM 0 points [-]

I think we may be talking past each other (or else I'm confused). My question for you is whether you would (or wish you would) sacrifice 1 DALY in order to have a 1 in 10^50 chance of creating 1+10^50 DALYs. And if so, then why?

(If my questions are becoming tedious then feel free to ignore them.)

Comment author: Normal_Anomaly 16 June 2011 07:52:46PM 0 points [-]

My question for you is whether you would (or wish you would) sacrifice 1 DALY in order to have a 1 in 10^50 chance of creating 1+10^50 DALYs. And if so, then why?

I don't trust questions involving numbers that large and/or probabilities that small, but I think so, yes.

Comment author: jsteinhardt 16 June 2011 08:21:24PM 0 points [-]

Probably good not to trust such number =). But can you share any reasoning or intuition for why the answer is yes?