nekomata comments on Problematic Problems for TDT - Less Wrong

36 Post author: drnickbone 29 May 2012 03:41PM

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

Comments (298)

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

Comment author: nekomata 24 May 2012 03:19:31PM 1 point [-]

Why is it important that there is a deterministic breaking rule ? When you would like random numbers, isn't it always better to have a distribution as close as random as possible, even if it is pseudo-random ?

That question is perhaps stupid, I have the impression that I am missing something important...

Comment author: drnickbone 25 May 2012 11:31:36AM 1 point [-]

Remember it is Omega implementing the tie-breaker rule, since it defines the problem.

The consequence of the tie-breaker is that the choosing agent knows that Omega's box-choice was a simple deterministic function of a mathematical calculation (or a proof). So the agent's uncertainty about which box contains the money is pure logical uncertainty.

Comment author: nekomata 25 May 2012 12:03:49PM 0 points [-]

Whoops... I can't believe I missed that. You are obviously right.