= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
It sounds like you just needed something to convince yourself with. TDT isn't special in this regard. With some inventiveness you could also have used quantum mechanics, evolutionary biology, extrapolated volition, or any number of other LW topics :-)
In response to
How I Lost 100 Pounds Using TDT
Assuming that the effects of dieting for a day are very small, it is likely that the utility of not eating knots today is lower than the utility of eating them for every possible future behavior.
A CDT agent only decides what it does now, so a CDT agents chooses to eat knots.
But an EDT,TDT or UDT agent would choose to diet.
In response to
Suggestions for a presentation on FAI?
Despite the fact that your audience is familiar with the singularity, I would still insist on the potential power of an AGI.
You could say something about the AI spreading on the Internet (from a 1000 to 1,000,000 time increase in processing power), bootstrapping nanotech and rewriting its source code, and that all of this could happen very quickly.
Ask them what they think such an AI would do, and if they show signs of anthropomorphism explain them that they are biased (mind projection fallacy for example).
You can also ask them what goal they would give to such an AI and show what kind of disaster may follow.
That can lead you to the complexity of wishes (a computer does not have common sens) and the complexity of human values.
I would also choose a nice set of links to lesswrong.org and singinst.com that they could read after the presentation.
It would be great if you could give us some feedback after your presentation : What worked, what did they find odd, what was their reaction, what questions did they ask.
Yes, clearly in some counterfactuals such knowledge works.
The reason we cannot use the knowledge from this particular counterfactual is that we have no knowledge about how the counterfactual was selected.
What do you additionally need to know about the counterfactuals? Where is the ambiguity (among what two examples of possible interpretations that change the analysis)? What do you mean by "selected"?
It may not be what wedrifid meant, but does Omega always appear after you see the result on the calculator?
Does Omega always ask :
"Consider the counterfactual where the calculator displayed opposite_of_what_you_saw instead of what_you_saw" ?
If that is true, then I guess it means that what Omega replaces your answer with on the test sheet in the worlds where you see "even" is the answer you write on the counterfactual test sheet in the worlds where you see "odd". And the same with "even" and "odd" exchanged.
In response to
A sense of logic
When I hear a bad argument, it feels like listening to music and hearing a wrong note.
In one case it is the logical causality that is broken, in the other the interval between notes.
Actually it is worse because a pianist usually goes back on track.
I like the writing here: very clear and useful.
I have a very simple problem when doing mathematics.
I want to write a proof. But I also want to save time. And so I miss nuances and make false assumptions and often think the answer is simpler than it is. It's almost certainly motivated cognition, rather than inadequate preparation or "stupidity" or any other problem.
I know the answer is "Stop wanting to save time" -- but how do you manipulate your own unvoiced desires?
In response to
comment
by
[deleted]
on
Compartmentalization in epistemic and instrumental rationality
Ask yourself what are the thrilling aspects of what you want to prove. Look for what you cannot explain, but feel is true.
I want to write a proof.
Before writing, you should be satisfied with your understanding of the problem. Try to find holes in it, as if you were a teacher reading some student work.
You should also ask yourself why you want to write a correct proof, and remember that a proof that is wrong is not a proof.
In response to
Newcomb's Problem: A problem for Causal Decision Theories
I'm considering continuing this sequence on an external blog. There's been some positive responses to these posts but there are also a lot of people who plainly consider that the quality of the posts aren't up to scratch. Moving them to an external site would let people follow them if they wanted to but would stop me from bombarding LW with another five or six posts.
Opinions?
I think that you should finish this sequence on lesswrong.
It is less technical and easier to understand than other posts on Decision Theory, and would therefore be valuable for newcomers.
In response to
Open Thread, August 2010
LW database download?
I was wondering if it would be a good idea to offer a download of LW or at least the sequences and Wiki. In the manner that Wikipedia is providing it.
The idea behind it is to have a redundant backup in case of some catastrophe, for example if the same happens to EY that happened to John C. Wright. It could also provide the option to read LW offline.
I support this idea.
But what about copyright issues? What if posts and comments are owned by their writer?
In response to
Open Thread, August 2010
Does anyone have any book recommendations for a gifted young teen? My nephew is 13, and he recently blew the lid off of a school-administered IQ test.
For his birthday, I want to give him some books that will inspire him to achieve great things and live a happy life full of hard work. At the very least, I want to give him some good math and science books. He has already has taken algebra, geometry and introductory calculus, so he knows some math already.
knb, does your nephew know about lesswrong, rationality and the Singularity? I guess I would have enjoyed reading such a website when I was a teenager.
When it comes to a physical book, Engines of Creation by Drexler can be a good way to introduce him to nanotechnology and what science can make happen. (I know that nanotech is far less important that FAI, but I think it is more "visual" : you can imagine those nanobots manufacturing stuff or curing diseases, while you cannot imagine a hard takeoff).
Teenagers need dream.
In response to
The Threat of Cryonics
I am against cryonics, and here's why (though I would love to hear a rebuttal):
Cryonics seems inherently, and destructively, to the human race, grossly selfish. Not only is cryonics a huge cost that could be spent elsewhere helping others, nature and evolution thrive on the necessity of refreshing the population of each species. Though it's speculation, I would assign the probability of evolution continuing to work (and improve) on the human race as pretty high - what gain does the human species have in preserving humans from the 21st century indefinitely, when 23rd century or later humans are better?
Overall, in no way can I think of cryonics benefiting anyone other than the individual's (I think simply genetic) desire to avoid death (maybe it benefits future anthropologists I guess), and the cost of cryonics, given that, is what turns me off so much. I can understand people indulging themselves every once in a while, but since I tend to think gratuitous selfishness is a bad thing for the human race, I find myself understanding cryonic-phobic people more than cryonics-supporters.
Is this an invalid view?
I just made a small calculation :
The number of deaths in the US is about 2.5 million per year.
The cost of cryonics is about $30000 per "patient" with the Cryonics Institute.
So if everyone wanted to be frozen, it would cost 75 billion dollars a year, about 0.5% of the US GDP, or 3% of the healthcare spending.
This neglects the economies of scales which could greatly reduce the price.
So even with a low probability of success, cryonics seems to be a good choice.
View more: Next
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Great post!
I strongly recommend Project Euler as a source of progressively trickier hurdles with instant feedback. It's especially helpful if (like me) you know a lot of math but little programming at the start.
Learning Computer Science and Theoretical Computer Science is useful for the kind of exercises found on Project Euler.