= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
royf comments on Update Then Forget - 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 (11)
How do you reconcile
with
given that you have discarded the data which led to the faulty reasoning? How do you know when it's safe to discard? In your example
If you forget the discarded cards, and later realize that you may have an incorrect map of the deck, aren't you SOL?
Should being the operative word. This refers to a "perfect" agent (emphasis added in text; thanks!).
People don't do this, as well they shouldn't, because we update poorly and need the original data to compensate.
If I remember the cards in play, I don't care about the discarded ones. If I don't, the discarded cards could help a bit, but that's not the heart of my problem.
What's a perfect agent? No one is infallible, except the Pope.
And even the Pope only claims to be infallible under certain carefully delineated conditions.
And as the tired old joke goes: bullet-proof glass.
This is a perfect agent, of theoretical interest if not practically realizable.
Assigning a probability to each possible world state?!? That is incredibly inefficient and wasteful. Any implementation attempt would result in slow stupidity - not anything intelligent.