chaosmosis comments on Raising the forecasting waterline (part 1) - Less Wrong

33 Post author: Morendil 09 October 2012 03:49PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (108)

Comments (108)

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

Comment author: chaosmosis 10 October 2012 07:02:40PM *  -2 points [-]

I considered a proposition like this, decided the ratio was roughly even, concluded that TraderJoe might therefore attempt to predict my answer (and choose their question so I'd be wrong),

I figured that it would be more embarrassing to say something like "It is true that I am a sparkly unicorn" than to say "It is false that an apple is a fruit". Falsehoods are much more malleable, largely as an effect of the fact that there are so many more of them than truths, also because they don't have to be consistent. Since falsehoods are more malleable it seems that they'd be more likely to be ones used in an attempt to insult someone.

decided they'd have no reliable basis on which to do so and would know that, and ultimately discarded the whole line of reasoning.

My heuristic in situations with recursive mutual modeling is to assume that everyone else will discard whatever line of reasoning is recursive. I then go one layer deeper into the recursion than whatever the default assumption is. It works well.

Comment author: chaosmosis 10 October 2012 07:04:26PM *  -1 points [-]

My heuristic in situations with recursive mutual modeling is to assume that everyone else will discard whatever line of reasoning is recursive. I then go one layer deeper into the recursion than whatever the default assumption is. It works well.

Preempt: None of you have any way of knowing whether this is a lie.

Comment author: chaosmosis 10 October 2012 07:07:55PM -1 points [-]

The parent of this comment (yes, this one) is a lie.

Comment author: chaosmosis 10 October 2012 07:08:03PM -2 points [-]

The parent of this comment (yes, this one) is a lie.

Comment author: chaosmosis 10 October 2012 07:09:02PM -2 points [-]

The parent of this comment is true. On my honor as a rationalist.

I would like people to try to solve the puzzle.

This comment (yes, this one) is true.

Comment author: Kindly 11 October 2012 05:24:07PM 4 points [-]

I think the solution is that you have no honor as a rationalist.

Comment author: chaosmosis 12 October 2012 04:23:48AM 0 points [-]

The solution I had in mind is:

  1. "None of you have any way of knowing whether this is a lie" is false because although you can't definitively prove what my process is or isn't you'll still have access to information that allows you to assess and evaluate whether I was probably telling the truth.
  2. Although "none of you have any way of knowing whether this is a lie" is false and thus my first instance of "the parent of this comment is a lie" seems justified, in reality the first instance of that statement is not true. The first instance of that statement is a lie because although "none of you have any way of knowing whether or not this is true" is false, it does not follow that it was a lie. In actuality, I thought that it was true at the time that I posted it, and only realized afterwards that it was false. There was no intent to deceive.

Therefore the grandparent of this comment is true, the greatgrandparent is true, the greatgreatgrandparent is false, and the greatgreatgreat grandparent is inaccurate.

Comment author: chaosmosis 12 October 2012 04:25:59AM *  0 points [-]

This whole line of riddling occurred because:

  • I wanted to confuse people, so they failed to properly evaluate the way I model people.
  • I wanted to distract people, so they chose not to bother properly evaluating the way I model people.
  • I wanted to amuse myself by pretending that I was the kind of person who cared about the above two.

I was wondering whether anyone would call me out on any of those.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit