= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
timtyler comments on A Request for Open Problems - 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 (104)
Note that in general, this sort of specification is uncomputable. To find the lexicographically first object which can't be described in less than a million bits, we would have to make a list of all objects which can be described in less than a million bits (and return the first thing that's not on the list). But we don't know if our UTM will halt for any given string with less than a million bits, so we can never know if our list is complete.
Not a serious problem - just consider objects which can't be described in less than a million bits after a million timesteps instead.
If a problem is so serious that you have to change your prior, then I'd call that a serious problem.
Did you understand why the problem is not serious? Your comment was nit-picking the example. Other similar examples make exactly the same point - but are not vulnerable to such nit-picking.