= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Fhyve comments on VNM agents and lotteries involving an infinite number of possible outcomes - 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 (8)
Why do we even need to deal with outcomes in the first place? For any outcome O, it is equivalent to the lottery L = pO where p = 1.
Also, how do you do LaTeX here?
Useful links for that here and here.
You don't need to talk about outcomes, but I like to talk in terms of outcomes anyway because it makes it easier for me to interpret the lotteries. If you would rather not talk about outcomes, it shouldn't be too hard to mentally translate everything in the post in terms of lotteries.