conchis comments on Bead Jar Guesses - Less Wrong

17 Post author: Alicorn 04 May 2009 06:59PM

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

Comments (127)

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

Comment author: conchis 06 May 2009 08:24:57PM 0 points [-]

I don't see any way to establish a reliable (non-anthropomorphic) chain of causality that connects there being red beads in the jars with Omega asking about red beads.

There's no need to, because probability is in the mind.

Comment author: JamesAndrix 07 May 2009 03:09:54PM 0 points [-]

If you're going to update based on what omega asks you then you must believe there is a connection that you have some information about.

If we don't know anything about omega's thought process or goals, then his questions tell us nothing.

Comment author: conchis 07 May 2009 03:35:03PM *  0 points [-]

I think our only disagreement is semantic.

If I initially divide the state space into solid colours, and then Omega asks if the bead could be striped, then I would say that's a form of new information - specifically, information that my initial assumption about the nature of the state space was wrong. (It's not information I can update on; I have to retrospectively change my priors.)

Apologies for the pointless diversion.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 07 May 2009 04:07:06PM *  0 points [-]

An ideal model of the real world must allow any miracle to happen, nothing should be logically prohibited.