gjm comments on Mahatma Armstrong: CEVed to death. - Less Wrong

23 Post author: Stuart_Armstrong 06 June 2013 12:50PM

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

Comments (60)

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

Comment author: gjm 24 September 2014 01:09:20PM 1 point [-]

but the process is clearly flawed.

Really? Why?

It seems perfectly plausible to me that there might be many fewer satisfactory endpoints than starting points. In most optimization processes, there's at most a discrete set of acceptable endpoints, even when there are uncountably infinitely many possible places to start.

Why would it indicate a flaw in CEV if the same turned out to be true there?