shminux comments on Update Then Forget - Less Wrong

9 Post author: royf 17 January 2013 06:36PM

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

Comments (11)

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

Comment author: royf 17 January 2013 11:26:24PM *  2 points [-]

an intelligent agent should update on it and then forget it.

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 you forget the discarded cards, and later realize that you may have an incorrect map of the deck, aren't you SOL?

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.

Comment author: shminux 18 January 2013 05:20:37PM 0 points [-]

What's a perfect agent? No one is infallible, except the Pope.

Comment author: DSimon 06 February 2013 02:17:51PM 2 points [-]

And even the Pope only claims to be infallible under certain carefully delineated conditions.

Comment author: Sengachi 20 January 2013 10:35:58AM 1 point [-]

And as the tired old joke goes: bullet-proof glass.

Comment author: royf 18 January 2013 06:31:59PM *  0 points [-]

This is a perfect agent, of theoretical interest if not practically realizable.

Comment author: timtyler 27 January 2013 02:20:48AM *  0 points [-]

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.