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.

TheOtherDave comments on CEV-tropes - Less Wrong Discussion

8 Post author: snarles 22 September 2014 06:21PM

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

Comments (15)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 22 September 2014 10:16:04PM 6 points [-]

I may hunt through my old comments to find the ones where I was working this through a few years back, but I think I would summarize mine as:

  • A target's CEV does not uniquely exist: there's a large set of equally legitimate extrapolation processes that can be performed on a given target and their results don't converge, because human values and preferences change based on the events we experience. So many of the above options are non-mutually-exclusively true, but that's not a particularly interesting fact.

  • Even for a fixed extrapolation-method, CEV(A + B) bears no predictable relationship to CEV(A) and CEV(B), for the same reason: being part of group A is a different environment than being part of group (A+B) and results in different values and preferences. So the CEV of a group containing me varies greatly depending on the group.

  • That X is part of (one) CEV for A doesn't guarantee that A would endorse X given the choice; in fact, if A is human it's unlikely, since (again) human values aren't fixed. So implementing our extrapolated volition -- any of them -- will likely mean violating our current preferences.