Vladimir_Nesov comments on 'Newcomblike' Video Game: Frozen Synapse - Less Wrong

2 Post author: AdeleneDawner 29 September 2011 04:26AM

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

Comments (27)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 29 September 2011 10:33:19AM *  38 points [-]

Let's not call shoes we like "rationalist shoes".

Edit: (Original title of the post was "Rationalist Video Game: Frozen Synapse".)

Comment author: Jayson_Virissimo 29 September 2011 11:03:45AM 16 points [-]

CARSON (turning to KEITH): Keith, would you like a cigarette? Here, this is a particularly rational brand.

KEITH (a bit bemused): "Rational...?" (A slight pause) Oh, I'm sorry, thank you. I don't smoke.

(Exclamations of disapproval from JONATHAN and GRETA.)

GRETA (lashing out): You don't smoke! Why not?

KEITH (taken back): Well, uh... because I don't like to.

CARSON (in scarcely-controlled fury): You don't like to! You permit your mere subjective whims, your feelings (this word said with utmost contempt) to stand in the way of reason and reality?

-Mozart Was a Red: A Morality Play In One Act, by Murray Rothbard

Comment author: Bongo 03 October 2011 11:09:05PM *  1 point [-]
Comment author: SilasBarta 29 September 2011 08:37:46PM 8 points [-]

I think it has a deeper connection than being "a game rationalists like": it seems like an actual game where you can practice conditioning on the other player's decision theory, because, IIUC, you learn the various ways they would respond to various choices you make. And conditioning on another's subjunctive output is a crucial element of the Newcomblike decision theory problems we talk about here, and discussed mainly in that context.

Comment author: AdeleneDawner 29 September 2011 08:54:00PM 5 points [-]

This is the aspect I was looking at, yes. I wasn't sure how to condense it to a few words suitable for a title.

Comment author: cata 29 September 2011 09:58:55PM 4 points [-]

I see where you're coming from, but the majority of competitive games have a large element of modeling your opponent and predicting his actions. Without playing this one, it seems pretty silly to advertise it as exceptional.

If you play it and learn something in particular that's interesting from it, then I look forward to that post.

Comment author: SilasBarta 29 September 2011 10:29:43PM 1 point [-]

I see where you're coming from, but the majority of competitive games have a large element of modeling your opponent and predicting his actions. Without playing this one, it seems pretty silly to advertise it as exceptional.

Most games give you one chance at estimating your opponents subjunctive decision theory. If I understand this one correctly, it involves a lot deeper probing of their decision theory. This has significant differences from regular "predict the opponent" game mechanics in that you have to build up a strategy that works even when the opponent knows it (and knows that you know that they know ...). So it seems like the emphasis is unique, and matches the kind of reasoning we've talked a lot about here in the context of newcomblike problems.

Comment author: shokwave 30 September 2011 12:28:48AM 3 points [-]

Very true - but then I would call it a Newcomblike Video Game. Which is actually juicier than Rationalist Video Game, come to think of it.

Comment author: AdeleneDawner 30 September 2011 01:20:11AM 2 points [-]

Should I change the title? I was under the impression that doing so is frowned on.

Comment author: shokwave 30 September 2011 06:54:59AM 2 points [-]

Less frowned on than "mis-using the word rationalist in the eyes of the community", I would wager. (Yeah, change it).

Comment author: MichaelHoward 29 September 2011 01:22:39PM 8 points [-]
Comment author: Raemon 29 September 2011 03:21:05PM 4 points [-]

I have a game I play on the subway called "Rationalist One-Foot", in which you stand on one foot for as long as possible and whoever falls over first loses. (It's "Rationalist" because I thus far have only played it with other aspiring rationalists.)

Comment author: Raemon 29 September 2011 03:26:34PM 1 point [-]

(yes, this is a joke)

(by which I mean I DO play a game called Rationalist One-Foot, and then hope that people do not actually think it reflects Rationality in the slightest)

Comment author: pedanterrific 29 September 2011 03:44:16PM 3 points [-]

The only way to win Rationalist One-Foot is not to play, obviously.

Comment author: Raemon 29 September 2011 04:21:12PM 16 points [-]

No, you win by standing on one foot for a very long time.

Comment author: Raemon 29 September 2011 07:17:48PM 17 points [-]

Actually, come to think of it, someone did win once by immediately pushing over everyone else. (Probably the best use of Rationality in a game of Rationalist One-Foot that I've seen)

Comment author: Dorikka 30 September 2011 12:01:41AM 1 point [-]

Curious why this got ten upvotes.

Comment author: Raemon 30 September 2011 03:11:18AM 4 points [-]

I'm also curious about that, although not really complaining. I think it's hilarious that my collective posts on Rationalist One-Foot have netted me 29 Karma so far.

(The other highly upvoted comment relating to Rationalist One-Foot was presumably both funny AND actually related to rationality. This one I assume was upvoted solely for comedic value. I actually didn't think it was all that funny, but it may have benefitted from being a relatively unique type of humor on Less Wrong, and if others were to attempt to replicate it it would quickly drop off in value)

Comment author: pedanterrific 30 September 2011 03:20:21AM 4 points [-]

Your tsukkomi-fu is strong.

Comment author: Raemon 30 September 2011 04:07:51AM 1 point [-]

I have no idea what that means, and google didn't help.

Comment author: pedanterrific 30 September 2011 04:22:29AM 1 point [-]

Oh, sorry. When I tried googling it, to make sure it was figure-outable, the explanation was the first hit. I guess that must be due to a history-filter on my end.

Comment author: [deleted] 29 September 2011 10:35:34AM 4 points [-]

But man, wearing these shoes allows me to think critically about the path I take to and from school...