= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
shminux comments on Naive TDT, Bayes nets, and counterfactual mugging - 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 (39)
Incidentally, if you vote yes on this, don't vote anonymously! You want to proclaim your decision to any partial Omega's out there...
Hey, the real Omega is supposed to not be lying, right? If I were to doubt that, given the extremely low prior of Omega submitting me to this test (compared to a fellow human trying to con me), then the math would probably tell me that the lottery has better odds.
I think pre-commitment is irrelevant if you assume Omega can actually read your decision algorithm and predict it deterministically. You want to be the type of person that would give Omega $1k if the fair coin toss didn't go your way; if you're not that type of person once the coin has been tossed, it's too late; and not being that type of person is only a good thing if it wasn't actually a fair coin.
What if I'm the type of person who does not honor counterfactual precommitment, only actual one?
Then expect to lose :-)
Lose what?
Lose money, at least in expectation, if ever these issues come up!
Please provide an example or a link to a somewhat realistic situation where this approach (distinguishing between actual and counterfactual precommitment) loses money.
Oh, you are being difficult, aren't you! :-P
Well, there is this interesting claim:
http://lesswrong.com/lw/1zw/newcombs_problem_happened_to_me/
It's an interesting account indeed, but hardly relevant to the point in hand, which is "you are guaranteed to lose this time if you precommit counterfactually, but should do it anyway".
I suppose you want to measure if people here think having the chance to pre-commit changes the correct answer? Thinking it does is not reflectively consistent, right? Could there be that reflective consistency isn't that important after all?
If it's actually Omega.
No, because he asked for $1,000. :P
I went with the original description, sorry :)