gjm comments on [LINK] The P + epsilon Attack (Precommitment in cryptoeconomics) - Less Wrong

18 Post author: DanielVarga 29 January 2015 02:02AM

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

Comments (22)

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

Comment author: gjm 06 November 2015 05:51:53PM 2 points [-]

They would become non-naive by being harmed (by losing a pile of money). Of course that's a lesser harm than being killed, and indeed "kill the non-resistant ones" is different from "harm the non-resistant ones until they become resistant", so I probably shouldn't have included the diseases-in-the-water example because it uses both effects. It's the latter that I had in mind as common to the examples I listed (as well as, of course, Clarity's original proposal).

Comment author: Jiro 06 November 2015 06:55:05PM 1 point [-]

Unless they're 12 years old, losing a couple of dollars is not really all that damaging.

Comment author: gjm 06 November 2015 08:45:16PM 1 point [-]

I bet the actual gain in wisdom, relative to just telling them "don't do that", is in proportion to the damage.