cousin_it comments on Formulas of arithmetic that behave like decision agents - Less Wrong

22 Post author: Nisan 03 February 2012 02:58AM

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

Comments (33)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: cousin_it 03 February 2012 01:03:12PM *  7 points [-]

Thanks for taking the time to think about this! But it seems to me that Löb's theorem should not be required to prove proposition 3 for a properly defined A. I'm guessing that you inadvertently defined A asymmetrically, as described in "AI cooperation in practice", instead of the symmetric way described in "model of UDT with a halting oracle" where swapping C and D shouldn't affect anything except the chicken stage.

Comment author: Nisan 13 February 2012 03:12:01AM 4 points [-]

Ah, I see. The agent described in "A model of UDT with a halting oracle" is more symmetric, because it has a choice of three actions: "Cooperate", "Defect", and "Break down and cry" (if we count failing to act as an action).

I think I see a way to prove the proposition without using Löb's theorem, and I don't even need to change the definition of A. I'll post here whether it works out.

Thanks for the comment!

Comment author: orthonormal 16 March 2012 03:24:56AM 2 points [-]

Did it work out?

Comment author: Nisan 16 March 2012 03:40:08AM 2 points [-]

I still intend to write up an answer to that question.

Comment author: orthonormal 16 March 2012 03:41:22AM 0 points [-]

Great!

Comment author: Nisan 06 April 2012 03:29:45AM 4 points [-]

I finally did it, and I believe it works.