You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Decius comments on XKCD - Frequentist vs. Bayesians - Less Wrong Discussion

18 Post author: brilee 09 November 2012 05:25AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (89)

Comments (89)

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

Comment author: Decius 09 November 2012 05:51:15PM 3 points [-]

I'll bet $50 that the sun hasn't just gone nova even in the presence of a neutron detector that says it has.

If I lose, I lose what $50 is worth in a world where the sun just went nova. If I win, I win $50 worth in a world where it didn't. That's a sucker bet even as the odds of the sun just having gone nova approach 1-Epsilon.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 09 November 2012 06:50:08PM 29 points [-]

"So," the Lord Pilot finally said. "What kind of asset retains its value in a market with nine minutes to live?"

"Booze for immediate delivery," the Master of Fandom said promptly. "That's what you call a -"

"Liquidity preference," the others chorused.

Comment author: Decius 09 November 2012 11:34:05PM 0 points [-]

So, what's the default clause on a contract for booze for immediate delivery? What makes you think a rational agent will fulfill the contract?

Comment author: gwern 10 November 2012 12:23:17AM *  5 points [-]

Maybe the ship's markets are built on Bitcoin and smart contracts with capability-based architectures & automation - they can't not deliver. (Hey, it's the future...)

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit