Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

Lumifer comments on Why Bayesians should two-box in a one-shot - Less Wrong Discussion

1 Post author: PhilGoetz 15 December 2017 05:39PM

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

Comments (25)

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

Comment author: cousin_it 19 December 2017 12:51:00PM *  0 points [-]

Let's say I build my Omega by using a perfect predictor plus a source of noise that's uncorrelated with the prediction. It seems weird that you'd deterministically two-box against such an Omega, even though you deterministically one-box against a perfect predictor. Are you sure you did the math right?

Comment author: Lumifer 19 December 2017 04:38:02PM 0 points [-]

It seems weird that you'd deterministically two-box against such an Omega

Even in the case when the random noise dominates and the signal is imperceptibly small?

Comment author: Luke_A_Somers 26 December 2017 12:11:58AM 0 points [-]

I think the more relevant case is when the random noise is imperceptibly small. Of course you two-box if it's basically random.