Vladimir_Nesov comments on A Rationalist's Tale - Less Wrong

82 Post author: lukeprog 28 September 2011 01:17AM

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

Comments (305)

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

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 11 September 2011 11:18:22PM *  0 points [-]

The decision theory and physics backing the intuitions are probably sound

Not by a long shot. Physics is probably mostly irrelevant here, it focuses only on our world; and decision theory is so flimsy and poorly understood that any related effort should be spent on improving it, for it's not even clear what it suggests to be the case, much less how to make use of its suggestions.

Comment author: Will_Newsome 11 September 2011 11:27:25PM 0 points [-]

I've seen QM become important because of decision problems where agents have to coordinate between quantum branches in order to reverse time. I can't go into that here but I'd at least like to flag that there are decision theory problems where things like quantum information theory shows up.

Comment author: Nisan 12 September 2011 05:24:37AM 0 points [-]

That actually sounds like it has a possibility of being interesting.

Comment author: Will_Newsome 11 September 2011 11:25:44PM -1 points [-]

Physics focuses on worlds across the entire quantum superposition. That's a pretty big neighborhood, no? Agreed about decision theory. When I said "choose to spend" I meant "I have a few hours to kill but I'm too lazy to do problem sets at the moment", not "I choose thaumaturgy as the optimal thing to study".

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 11 September 2011 11:32:45PM 0 points [-]

Physics focuses on worlds across the entire quantum superposition. That's a pretty big neighborhood, no?

Okay, that makes sense as a rich playground for acausal interaction. I don't know what pieces of intuition about physics you refer to as useful for reasoning about acausal effects of human decisions though.