Perplexed comments on Is Fairness Arbitrary? - Less Wrong

3 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 14 August 2008 01:54AM

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

Comments (37)

Sort By: Old

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

Comment author: dreeves 14 August 2008 07:01:51AM 2 points [-]

I have a special interest in faireness. There's a technical definition in mechanism design: a mechanism (say for allocating goods) is Fair if all participants derive equal utility from participating. Compare to Efficiency: total utility is maximized (each good went to the person who wanted it most). You get both fairness and efficiency by having the winners pay the losers just enough so that the losers are as happy with the money as the winners are with the booty minus the money. A related mechanism property is envy-freeness: no one would prefer to trade places with anyone else.

Comment author: Perplexed 17 November 2010 12:38:01AM *  0 points [-]

There's a technical definition in mechanism design: a mechanism (say for allocating goods) is Fair if all participants derive equal utility from participating.

Could you provide a reference for this? The use of interpersonal comparison of utility here surprises me.

I thought that the usual definition of fairness took into account both what you gain from your participation and what other people gain from your participation.

ETA: Are you referring to the same notion of fairness as in this famous paper by Rabin?