Tehom comments on Pascal's Muggle: Infinitesimal Priors and Strong Evidence - Less Wrong

43 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 08 May 2013 12:43AM

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

Comments (404)

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

Comment author: Tehom 20 May 2013 06:11:13PM -1 points [-]

I think the simpler solution is just to use a bounded utility function. There are several things suggesting we do >this, and I really don't see any reason to not do so, instead of going through contortions to make unbounded >utility work.

But that's essentially already the case. Just consider the bound to be 3^^^^3 utilons, or even an illimited number of them. Those are not infinite, but still allow all the situations and arguments made above.

Paradoxes of infinity weren't the issue in this case.

Comment author: Sniffnoy 20 May 2013 07:40:40PM 0 points [-]

Again, individual utility numbers are not meaningful.

I'm not sure which "situations and arguments" you're saying this still allows. It doesn't allow the divergent sum that started all this.