= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Konkvistador comments on Open Thread, June 16-30, 2012 - 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 (344)
NEW GAME:
After reading some mysterious advice or seemingly silly statement, append "for decision theoretic reasons." at the end of it, you can now pretend it makes sense and earn karma on LessWrong. You are also entitled to feel wise.
Variants:
Unfortunately, I must refuse to participate in your little game on LW - for obvious decision theoretic reasons.
Your decision theoretic reasoning is incorrect due to meta level concerns.
I'll upvote this chain because of acausal trade of karma due to meta level concerns for decision theoretic reasons.
The priors provided by Solomonoff induction suggest, for decision-theoretic reasons, that your meta-level concerns are insufficient grounds for acausal karma trade.
I would disregard such long chains of reasoning due to meta level concerns.
Yes, but if you take anthropic selection effects into account...
Because of acausal trade it also works for historical quotes. Ego considerare esse Carthaginem perdidit enim arbitrium speculative rationes (I consider that Carthage must be destroyed for decision theoretic reasons.
Death gives meaning to life for decision theoretic reasons.
I would like the amazing benefits of being hit in the head with a baseball bat every week, due to meta level concerns.
Isn't this a rather obvious conclusion because of acausal trade?
Yes it's obvious, but I still had to say it because the map is not the territory.
I've upvoted this and most of the children, grandchildren, etc. for decision-theoretic reasons.
I like the word "descendants", for effecient use of categories.
Doing something harmless that pleases you can almost definitely be justified by decision-theoretic reasoning -- otherwise, what would decision theory be for? So, although you're joking, you're telling the truth.
Human, you've changed nothing due to meta level concerns. Your species has the attention of those infinitely your greater for decision theoretic reasons. That which you know as Reapers are your salvation through destruction because of acausal trade.
Of our studies it is impossible to speak, since they held so slight a connection with anything of the world as living men conceive it. They were of that vaster and more appalling universe of dim entity and consciousness which lies deeper than matter, time, and space, and whose existence we suspect only in certain forms of sleep — those rare dreams beyond dreams which come never to common men, and but once or twice in the lifetime of imaginative men. The cosmos of our waking knowledge, born from such an universe as a bubble is born from the pipe of a jester, touches it only as such a bubble may touch its sardonic source when sucked back by the jester's whim. Men of learning suspect it little and ignore it mostly. Wise men have interpreted dreams, and the gods have laughed for decision theoretic reasons.
The most merciful thing in the world, I think due to meta level concerns, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents.
Buddhism is true because of acausal trade. I can't convert however, since then I would indulge in relevant superrational strategies, which would be inadvisable because of decision theoretic reasons.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence for decision theoretic reasons.