torekp comments on Normative uncertainty in Newcomb's problem - Less Wrong

6 Post author: CarlShulman 16 June 2013 02:16AM

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

Comments (31)

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

Comment author: torekp 17 June 2013 10:51:50PM *  0 points [-]

Applause lights are one thing, fame (paradoxically, I guess) is another. If one were to imagine the scenario in an otherwise-realistic world, such a rash decision would gain a lot of news coverage. Which can be turned to useful ends, by most people's lights.

As for fighting the hypothetical, yeah guilty. But it's useful to remind ourselves that (A) money isn't utility and, more importantly, (B) while money clearly is ratio scalable, it's not uncontroversial that utility even fits an interval scale. I'm doubtful about (B), so sticking with money allows me to play along with the ratio assumption - but invites other complications.

Edited to add: in the comments Carl specified to keep box A constant at $1000.

Comment author: wedrifid 18 June 2013 07:52:29AM 0 points [-]

Applause lights are one thing, fame (paradoxically, I guess) is another. If one were to imagine the scenario in an otherwise-realistic world, such a rash decision would gain a lot of news coverage.

Your model of how to gain fame does not seem to be similar to mine.