= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
almondguy comments on Open Thread, May 19 - 25, 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (289)
Tetlock thinks improved political forecasting is good. I haven't read his whole book but maybe someone can help me cheat. Why is improved forecasting not zero sum? suppose the USA and Russia can both forecast better but have different interests. so what?
[Edit] my guess might be that on areas of common interest like economics, improved forecasting is good. But on foreign policy...?
A greatly simplified example: two countries are having a dispute and the tension keeps rising. They both believe that they can win against the other in a war, meaning neither side is willing to back down in the face of military threats. Improved forecasting would indicate who would be the likely winner in such a conflict, and thus the weaker side will preemptively back down.
For the simple reason that politics is not zero-sum, foreign policy included.
cooperation is not zero sum. Why does better forecasting lead to more cooperation?
I would guess that it does--but if somebody hasn't seriously addressed this then I don't think I'm doing foreign policy questions on GJP Season 4
Zero-sum means any actions of the participants do not change the total. Either up or down.
A nuclear exchange between US and Russia would not be zero-sum, to give an example. Better forecasting might reduce its chance by lessening the opportunities for misunderstanding, e.g. when one side mistakenly thinks the other side is bluffing.
As to more cooperation, better forecasting implies better understanding of the other side which implies less uncertainty about consequences which implies more trust which implies more cooperation.
How about the governments of the US and Russia correctly forecast that more hostility means more profits for their cronies, and increase military spending?
Yes, and..?
If you want something that comes with ironclad guarantees that it leads to only goodness and light, go talk to Jesus. That's his domain.
That would still not be zero-sum. Which direction you think it is depends on your views.
International politics is zero-sum once you've already reached the Pareto frontier and can only move along it, but if forecasting is sufficiently bad you might not even be close to the Pareto frontier.
Right. A lot of politics is not zero-sum. Reduced uncertainty and better information may enable compromises that before had seemed too risky. Forecasting could help identify which compromises would work and which wouldn't. Etc.
thanks army and bramflakes for illustrating. My guess is to agree--but I still have doubts. Maybe they have nothing to do after all with "zero sum." I think I'm concerned that forecasting could be used by governments against citizens. Before participating again I may need to read something in more detail about why this is unlikely. and also why I shouldn't participate in SciCast instead!
Improved forecasting might mean that both sides do fewer stupid (negative sum) things.
I don't think Tetlock talks about that much.
Imagine a better forecast about whether invading Iraq reduces terrorism, or about whether Saddam would survive the invasion. Wouldn't both sides make wiser decisions?
so that's a good thought. I think you're saying that nations aren't coolly calculating rational actors but groups where foreign policy is often based on false claims.
I guess it really depends on where forecasting is deployed. It will increase the power of whoever has access. If accessible to George Bush, then George is more powerful. If accessible to the public, the public is. So my question depends (at least partly) on the kind of forecasting and who controls the resulting info
also this paper seems relevant