= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
skeptical_lurker comments on [MIRIx Cambridge MA] Limiting resource allocation with bounded utility functions and conceptual uncertainty - 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
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Comments (28)
I wasn't doubting your math, I was doubting the underlying assumption of a bounded utility function.
Of course, if we want to get technical, a finite computer can't store an infinite number of models of chocolate anyway.
I can defend that assumption: It is impossible for an expected utility maximizer to have an unbounded utility function, given only the assumption that the space of lotteries is complete. http://lesswrong.com/lw/gr6/vnm_agents_and_lotteries_involving_an_infinite/
Oh, I see. OK.
For sure. Nor, indeed, can our finite brains. (This is one reason why our actual utility functions, in so far as we have them, probably are bounded. Of course that isn't a good reason to use bounded utility functions in theoretical analyses unless all we're hoping to do is to understand the behaviour of a single human brain.)