shminux comments on Backward Reasoning Over Decision Trees - Less Wrong

60 Post author: Yvain 30 June 2012 03:17AM

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

Comments (57)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: shminux 28 June 2012 03:25:38PM *  1 point [-]

I doubt that the line-item veto is a good example, because there are so many complications in any kind of real politics. For example, C&C might agree in advance that a certain line item will be included only if some other item is not vetoed. This improves everyone's utility without going all the way back to the "all-or-nothing" setup, in essence prioritizing the line items.

An example where workarounds are impossible or unlikely would illustrate the standard idea of working backwards better.

Comment author: drethelin 28 June 2012 03:55:47PM 1 point [-]

How about a hostage negotiation? If the negotiator has a gun, that gives him more options, but it also means the kidnapper has to take it into account. This may lead to a breakdown in communications.

Comment author: shminux 28 June 2012 08:16:36PM -1 points [-]

I think that expecting rationality from a kidnapper is pushing it a bit.