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.

Leonhart comments on Selfish preferences and self-modification - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: Manfred 14 January 2015 08:42AM

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

Comments (24)

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

Comment author: Leonhart 15 January 2015 08:51:48PM 1 point [-]

Do you really think your own nature that fragile?

(Please don't read that line in a judgemental tone. I'm simply curious.)

I would automatically cooperate with a me-fork for quite a while if the only "divergence" that took place was on the order of raising a different hand, or seeing the same room from a different angle. It doesn't seem like value divergence would come of that.

I'd probably start getting suspicious in the event that "he" read an emotionally compelling novel or work of moral philosophy I hadn't read.

Comment author: ike 15 January 2015 08:57:49PM 0 points [-]

If we raised different hands, I do think it would quickly cause us to completely diverge in terms of how many body movements are equal. That doesn't mean we would be very different, or that I'm fragile. I'm pretty much the same as I was a week ago, but my movements now are different. I was just pointing out that "decisions" isn't that much more well defined than what it was coming to define (divergent).

I would automatically cooperate

In a True Prisoner's Dilemma, or even in situations like the OP? The divergence there is that one person knows they are "A" and the other "B", in ways relevant to their actions.

Comment author: Leonhart 15 January 2015 09:44:08PM *  1 point [-]

Ah, I see. We may not disagree, then. My angle was simply that "continuing to agree on all decisions" might be quite robust versus environmental noise, assuming the decision is felt to be impacted by my values (i.e. not chocolate versus vanilla, which I might settle with a coinflip anyway!)

In the OP's scenario, yes, I cooperate without bothering to reflect. It's clearly, obviously, the thing to do, says my brain.

I don't understand the relevance of the TPD. How can I possibly be in a True Prisoner's Dilemma against myself, when I can't even be in a TPD against a randomly chosen human?

Comment author: ike 15 January 2015 09:53:04PM 0 points [-]

OP is assuming selfishness, which makes this True. Any PD is TPD for a selfish person. Is it still the obvious thing to do if you're selfish?

Comment author: Leonhart 15 January 2015 10:04:59PM 0 points [-]

Yes, for a copy close enough that he will do everything that I will do and nothing that I won't. In simple resource-gain scenarios like the OP's, I'm selfish relative to my value system, not relative to my locus of consciousness.

Comment author: ike 16 January 2015 02:05:43PM 0 points [-]

So we have different models of selfishness, then. My model doesn't care about anything but "me", which doesn't include clones.