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.

bogdanb comments on Duller blackmail definitions - Less Wrong Discussion

7 Post author: Stuart_Armstrong 15 July 2013 10:08AM

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

Comments (44)

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

Comment author: bogdanb 15 July 2013 09:18:46PM 0 points [-]

In all these cases, your paying/not paying imply the same futures, but it's different because of the disagreement point.

I’m not sure about the others, but in the taxes/police example, the implied futures in the pay/not pay are not the same:

"pay your taxes, and the police will protect you from criminals" means if you don’t pay, P(shop smashed) = X, if you pay P(shop smashed) << X.

"pay your taxes, and the police won't smash up your shop" means if you don’t pay, P(shop smashed) = X, if you pay P(shop smashed) >> X.

(Note that X is the same for both scenarios. That is, P(shop smashed|taxes not payed) does not depend on which scenario the police chooses.)