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.

AlexMennen comments on Harsanyi's Social Aggregation Theorem and what it means for CEV - Less Wrong Discussion

21 Post author: AlexMennen 05 January 2013 09:38PM

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

Comments (86)

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

Comment author: AlexMennen 05 January 2013 10:20:32PM 2 points [-]

They could just insist on a normalization scheme that is blatantly biased in favor of their utility function. In a theoretical sense, this doesn't cause a problem, since there is no objective way to define an unbiased normalization anyway. (of course, if everyone insisted on biasing the normalization in their favor, there would be a problem)

Comment author: timtyler 05 January 2013 10:45:20PM *  3 points [-]

I think most of those involved realise that such projects tend to be team efforts - and therefore some compromises over values will be necessary. Anyway, I think this is the main difficulty for utilitarians: most people are not remotely like utilitarians - and so don't buy into their bizarre ideas about what the future should be like.