TheOtherDave comments on Welcome to Less Wrong! (2012) - Less Wrong

25 Post author: orthonormal 26 December 2011 10:57PM

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

Comments (1430)

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

Comment author: TheOtherDave 01 January 2012 09:05:59PM 0 points [-]

Really? What's your estimate of the probability that Bakkot's inclusion in a CEV-calculating-algorythm's target mind-space will make it more likely for the resulting CEV to tolerate infanticide?

Comment author: Multiheaded 01 January 2012 09:55:39PM 1 point [-]

Pretty negligible, but still orders of magnitude above Bakkot just altering society to tolerate infanticide on his own.

Comment author: wedrifid 01 January 2012 10:33:57PM 1 point [-]

I would tend to agree for what it's worth.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 01 January 2012 10:10:14PM *  -1 points [-]

I think I'm not understanding you.

Call P1 the probability that Bakkot's inclusion in a CEV-calculating-algorythm's target mind-space will make it more likely for the resulting CEV to tolerate infanticide. Call P2 the probability that Bakkot isn't capable of making infanticide legal, disregarding P1.

You seem to be saying P1 approximately equals 0 (which is what I understand "negligible" to mean), and P2 approximately equals 1, and that P2-P1 does not approximately equal 1.

I don't see how all three of those can be true at the same time.

Edit: if the downvotes are meant to indicate I'm wrong, I'd love a correction as well. OTOH, if they're just meant to indicate the desire for fewer comments like these, that's fine.

Comment author: dlthomas 01 January 2012 10:24:17PM 0 points [-]

Where do you get "P2 approximately equals 1"?

Comment author: TheOtherDave 01 January 2012 10:42:05PM 0 points [-]

Multiheaded said "That only has a certainty approaching 1 if we all went and forgot about CEV and related prospects."
I understand "that" to refer to "bakkot isn't able to make make infanticide legal".
I conclude that the probability that Bakkot isn't capable of making infanticide legal, if we forget about CEV and related prospects, is approximately 1.
P2 is the probability that Bakkot isn't capable of making infanticide legal, if we disregard the probability that Bakkot's inclusion in a CEV-calculating-algorythm's target mind-space will make it more likely for the resulting CEV to tolerate infanticide.
I conclude that P2 is approximately 1.