= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
TheOtherDave comments on Are multiple uploads equivilant to extra life? - 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 (54)
It's worth noting that the question of what is a better way of evaluating such prospects is distinct from the question of how I in fact evaluate them. I am not claiming that having multiple incomensurable metrics for evaluating the value of lived experience is a good design, merely that it seems to be the way my brain works.
Given the way my brain works, I suspect repeating a typical day as you posit would add disvalue, for reasons similar to #2.
Would it be better if I instead evaluated it as per #1? Yeah, probably.
Still better would be if I had a metric for evaluating events such that #1 and #2 converged on the same answer.
Good point. What I meant was closer to "which method of evaluation does the best job of capturing how you intuitively assign value" rather than which way is better in some sort of objective sense. For me #1 seems to describe how I assign value and disvalue to repeating copies better than #2 does, but I'm far from certain.
So I think that from my point of view Omega offering to extend the length of a repeated event so it contains a more even mixture of good and bad is the same as Omega offering to not repeat a bad event and repeat a good event instead. Both options contain zero value, I would rather Omega leave me alone and let me go do new things. But they're better than him repeating a bad event.