PhilGoetz comments on Average utilitarianism must be correct? - Less Wrong

2 Post author: PhilGoetz 06 April 2009 05:10PM

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

Comments (159)

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

Comment author: PhilGoetz 07 April 2009 03:17:03AM *  1 point [-]

I bet you're thinking of 101 as "barely more than 10 times as much" of something that faces diminishing returns.

No. I've explained this in several of the other comments. That's why I used the term "utility function", to indicate that diminishing returns are already taken into account.