Vladimir_Nesov comments on A Problem About Bargaining and Logical Uncertainty - Less Wrong

23 Post author: Wei_Dai 21 March 2012 09:03PM

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

Comments (45)

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

Comment author: cousin_it 25 March 2012 01:02:20AM *  1 point [-]

Not if the correct decision depends on an abstract fact that you can't access, but can reference.

Good point, thanks. I think it kills my argument.

ETA: no, it doesn't.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 25 March 2012 04:58:28PM *  1 point [-]

As Tyrrell points out, it's not as simple. When you're considering the strategy of what to do if you're on the giving side of the counterfactual ("Should P pay up if asked?"), the fact that you're in that situation already implies all you wanted to know about the digit of pi, so the strategy is not to play conditionally on the digit of pi, but just to either pay up or not, one bit as you said. But the value of the decision on that branch of the strategy follows from the logical implications of being on that branch, which is something new for UDT!