= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Bugmaster comments on Thoughts on the Singularity Institute (SI) - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (1270)
I think that depends on what level of suppression one is willing to employ, though in general I agree with you. FinalState had admitted to being a troll, but even if he was an earnest crank, the magnitude of the expected value of his work would still be quite small, even when you do account for SIAI's bias.
What are they, out of curiosity ? I think I missed that part of the Sequences...
It's not in the main Sequences, it's in the various posts on decision theory and Pascal's Muggings. I hope our resident decision theory experts will correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is this. If an agent is of the type that gives into Pascal's Mugging, then other agents who know that have an incentive to mug them. If all potential muggers know that they'll get no concessions from an agent, they have no incentive to mug them. I don't think this covers "Pascal's Gift" scenarios where an agent is offered a tiny probability of a large positive utility, but it covers scenarios involving a small chance of a large disutility.
I'm not sure that that is in fact an admission of being a troll... it reads as fairly ambiguous to me. Do other people have readings on this?