= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Viliam_Bur comments on Decision Theory: Value in Time - 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 (7)
The topic is interesting, but I hope you will write something non-trivial. Sorry for unspecific advice, but this is how it is. I guess I could be more specific about what I consider trivial. Something like this:
"There is uncertainty, therefore $100 one year later is only worth r × $100 now, where r is the discount rate, a number between 0 and 1. Two years later, it's r^2 × $100, etc. Similarly, a cake one year later is worth r cakes now. If we make an infinite sum 1 + r + r^2 + ..., the result is finite, therefore immortality doesn't have infinite value." -- This alone probably wouldn't provide any value to most readers.
If you can say more than this, I'd like to hear it. Also, please don't split it to multiple articles; and if you really have to, then please put something interesting in the first article already, don't make it merely a teaser.
Well, I do have to start there, but, actually, i wanted to go different way. I will argue that immortality has different value given the different information and preferences we have.
(Because, it's not 1 + r + r^2... it's v(0) + v(1) r + v(2) r^2 +.... where vx is value we obtain in x-th year of our life. This can converge or diverge, it is dependent on our evaluation of v's and ofc. r.)
Thank you for advice, I will give my best to make it short and interesting. Though not at cost of making it unclear and therefore useless.
We do not have constant utility functions, so infinite limits with respect to time are not actually that interesting.