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.

Coscott comments on The Ultimate Sleeping Beauty Problem - Less Wrong Discussion

5 Post author: Coscott 30 September 2013 12:48AM

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

Comments (39)

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

Comment author: Coscott 30 September 2013 07:21:53AM 0 points [-]

Sure, that is fine.

I am still curious though in the case where we do not reformulate the interview to that whether or not you think that the interviewer telling the beauty how many times the coin was flipped afterwords changes the question.

Comment author: shminux 30 September 2013 07:37:09AM -1 points [-]

Well, there are two issues there, one is the divergent weights given to the lower-probability flip sequences (the St. Petersburg paradox), the other is the meaning of the term "subjective probability". Asking for the odds gives a concrete interpretation to the latter. As for the former, you can probably get any answer you want, depending on how you choose to sum the divergent series.