= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
shminux comments on Have you changed your mind lately? On what? - 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 (105)
Are you saying that you are OK with having x stabbed toes being incommensurate with torture, but x+1 being commensurate ? This would be a very peculiar utility function.
Yes, that is what I am saying. One can deduce from this that I don't find it so peculiar.
To be clear, this doesn't reflect at all what goes on in my personal decision-making process, since I'm human. However, I don't find it any stranger than, say, having torture be arbitrarily 3^3^2 times worse than a dust speck, rather than 3^3^2 + 5.
Sarcasm time: I mean, seriously - are you honestly saying that at 3^3^2 + 1 dust specks, it's worse than torture, but at 3^3^2 - 1, it's better? That's so... arbitrary. What's so special about those two dust specks? That would be so... peculiar.
As soon as you allow the arbitrary size of a number to be "peculiar," there is no longer any such thing as a non-peculiar set of preferences. That's just how consistent preferences work. Discounting sets of preferences on account of "strangeness and arbitrariness" isn't worth the effort, really.
I don't mean peculiar in any negative sense, just that it would not be suitable for goal optimization.
Is that really what you meant? Huh.
Could you elaborate?