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

In response to Aiming at the Target
Comment author: Nate_Barna3 27 October 2008 08:12:09AM 0 points [-]

Vladimir: Some kind of bounded rationality? Could you give us a taste?

I was wondering the same thing. I'd be less interested in a decision theory for sub-Omegas and more interested in one for Omegas.

Comment author: Nate_Barna3 19 October 2008 04:21:31PM 0 points [-]

pdf23ds: I think considerations like these are probably not too meaningful. You're likely to be mentally unstable or misguided in some small way that has an overriding influence (at least at this level of effect) that you're unaware of.

Also, they might not be too meaningful if, anticipating in advance, one is allowed to say at a future point, 'Well, I applied virtues R, and this had optimal outcome A', because, anticipating in advance, one is allowed to think at a future point, 'Well, I applied virtues R, and unfortunately this had suboptimal outcome B'. This might be like planning to try and not planning to do, if the virtue variable is bound and the outcome variable is free.

Comment author: Nate_Barna3 19 October 2008 03:00:53PM 0 points [-]

Good consequences may come from good virtues, I gather.

Comment author: Nate_Barna3 17 October 2008 01:58:45AM 0 points [-]

Eliezer: I regard finance as more of a useful tool than an ultimate end of intelligence - I'm not sure it's the maximum possible fun we could all be having under optimal conditions.

Perhaps under optimal conditions you're able to compensate for the lack of buying power of n dollars, where this is the amount that can buy everything that's for sale, i.e., everything that everyone else combined can generate.