Luke_A_Somers comments on Defining a limited satisficer - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (11)
I generally think of satisficing being a local property of a utility function. I may want to maximize my utility, but locally speaking I am indifferent among many, many things, so I satisfice in respect to those things.
I think that looking at it in this way might be more productive.
Aside from that,
It is likely to do the former up to a point, and would certainly do the latter after a point. As Vaniver noted, you haven't specified that point.
Quite agreed. A satisficer is an agent with a negative term in their utility function for disruption and effort. It's not limiting it's utility, it's limited in how much stuff it can do without reducing utility.
Dagon, despite agreeing, you seem to be saying the opposite to LukeASomers (and your position is closer to mine).