CCC comments on Humans in Funny Suits - Less Wrong

22 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 30 July 2008 11:54PM

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

Comments (128)

Sort By: Old

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

Comment author: gjm 22 April 2016 10:31:08AM -1 points [-]

separable into groups

Too specific, I think. Toy example: we have species labelled 1,2,3,4,5; species 1 apart are rubber-foreheads to one another, but species 2+ apart are starfish.

Comment author: CCC 24 April 2016 10:04:33PM 0 points [-]

Okay, I see what you're getting at, and it's a good point; but as a minor quibble, "starfish aliens" are, to my reading, pretty completely alien, while rubber-foreheads have strong similarity. You could have species 1, 2, 3, 4, 5... with each neighbouring pair being rubber-foreheads relative to each other, and becoming less and less similar as you travel down the line, but given those constraints I don't think you can have proper starfish until you're a good distance along that line; say, 10+ spaces. (Starfish and rubber-foreheads are extremes of, respectively, "different" and "similar" - and there are a lot of gradations between those extremes).

Of course, in any realistic lineup, it won't be a neatly spaced line; number 4 might be missing entirely, and numbers 5 and 6 surprisingly close, and so on.

Comment author: gjm 25 April 2016 01:23:40PM -1 points [-]

Yes, the distinction between rubber-foreheads and starfish is a fuzzy one and the ratio between "clearly rubber-foreheads" and "clearly starfish" is probably bigger than 2 for most plausible ways of quantifying the differences. I was only trying to indicate the logical structure of my objection, not trying to make a plausible and quantitatively correct example.

Comment author: CCC 26 April 2016 07:24:43AM 0 points [-]

Right. I apologise for over-nitpicking.