shminux comments on On accepting an argument if you have limited computational power. - Less Wrong

22 Post author: Dmytry 11 January 2012 05:07PM

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

Comments (85)

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

Comment author: dlthomas 12 January 2012 10:00:14PM 0 points [-]

How do you determine if the model is testable? What if there is in principle a test, but it has unacceptable consequences in at least one reasonably probable model?

Comment author: shminux 12 January 2012 10:27:52PM 0 points [-]

For the particular scenario described in the Pascal's mugger, I provided a reasonable way to test it. If the mugger wants to dicker about the ways of testing it, I might decide to listen. It is up to the mugger to provide a satisfactory test. Hand-waving and threats are not tests. You are saying that there are models where testing is unfeasible or too dangerous to try. Name one.

Comment author: dlthomas 13 January 2012 06:56:09PM 1 point [-]

That such models exist is trivial - take model A, add a single difference B, where exercising the difference is bad. For instance,

Model A: universe is a simulation Model B: universe is a simulation with a bug that will crash the system, destroying the universe, if X, but is otherwise identical to model A.

Models that would deserve to be raised to the level of our attention in the first place, however, will take more thought.

Comment author: shminux 13 January 2012 07:59:41PM 0 points [-]

By all means, apply more thought. Until then, I'm happy to stick by my testability assertion.

Comment author: dlthomas 13 January 2012 08:10:34PM 2 points [-]

A simple example might be if more of the worries around the LHC were a little better founded.

Comment author: shminux 13 January 2012 09:14:13PM 0 points [-]

Ah yes, that is good one. Suppose a mad scientist threatens to make an earth-swallowing black hole in the LHC, unless his demands for world domination are met. What would be a prudent course of action? Calculate the utility of complying vs non-complying and go with the higher utility choice? Or do something else? (I have a solution or two, but will hold off suggesting any for now.)