Transfuturist comments on Acausal trade barriers - Less Wrong

9 Post author: Stuart_Armstrong 11 March 2015 01:40PM

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

Comments (21)

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

Comment author: Transfuturist 13 March 2015 06:53:57PM 0 points [-]

Defining events seems much easier than defining identity.

But events X and Y are specifically regarding the activation of Clippy and Stapley, so a definition of identity would need to be included in order to prove the barrier to acausal trade that p' and s' are claimed to have. Unless the event you speak of is something like "the button labeled 'release AI' is pressed," but there is a greater-than-epsilon probability that the button will itself fail. Not sure if that provides any significant penalty to the utility function.

Comment author: Stuart_Armstrong 16 March 2015 11:25:30AM 0 points [-]

Unless the event you speak of is something like "the button labeled 'release AI' is pressed,"

Pretty much that, yes. More like "the button press fails to turn on the AI (an exceedingly unlikely event, so doesn't affect utility calculations much, but can still be conditioned on).