Vaniver comments on Rationality Quotes December 2013 - Less Wrong

7 Post author: Cyan 17 December 2013 08:43PM

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

Comments (457)

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

Comment author: Vaniver 02 December 2013 05:18:13PM 5 points [-]

What happens when both you and your enemy "know the enemy and know yourself". How can neither of you not fear the result of a hundred battles?

Two interpretations jump to mind: the first is that 'fear' is interpreted as uncertainty, the second is that mutually fully informed agents could do enough damage to each other that war between them is senseless, and thus there are no battles.

Comment author: AndHisHorse 03 December 2013 10:52:33AM 2 points [-]

Alternately, I interpreted it as saying that war between two such agents will always be a stalemate, with both sides gingerly risking pawns and trading minor victories which, while never leading to substantial success, do not lead to crushing defeat, either.

Of course, your second interpretation is much more applicable in the general case of two sides which are not evenly matched, in which case the weaker one will accept their defeat (either by surrendering or deciding to go out in a defiant but hopeless battle), in which case your first interpretation comes into play.