Conversation

Notices

1. mcc (mcc@mastodon.social)'s status on Wednesday, 29-Mar-2023 05:31:39 JST mcc

   Have you ever noticed how many canonical "paradoxes" just sort of evaporate if you decline to recognize Bayesian inference as a thing that works

   • mcc (mcc@mastodon.social)'s status on Wednesday, 29-Mar-2023 05:31:45 JST mcc

     in reply to

     (This might be kind of vague so this is the kind of thing I'm talking about: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_mugging A shocking number of problems of this type that make me immediately respond with "why do you think this is a difficult problem?" seem to wind up mentioning Eliezer Yudkowsky when you look into why people are talking about them.)

     Adrian Cochrane repeated this.
   • mcc (mcc@mastodon.social)'s status on Wednesday, 29-Mar-2023 05:31:45 JST mcc

     in reply to

     INTERNET RATIONALIST: Consider the following thought experiment. Imagine a hyperintelligent artificial intelligence–

     ME: No

     INTERNET RATIONALIST: What

     ME: I am declining to imagine the hyperintelligent artificial intelligence.

     INTERNET RATIONALIST:

     ME: I'm thinking about birds right now

     INTERNET RATIONALIST:

     ME: Dozens of crows, perched atop great standing stones

   • mcc (mcc@mastodon.social)'s status on Wednesday, 29-Mar-2023 05:31:46 JST mcc

     in reply to

     Hmm so it looks like you started with some absurd priors and you were able to use them to prove some absurd conclusions. Now you're acting like this is a fundamental challenge to the idea of "rationality" and you've made a wikipedia page. Seems to me like you just selected some absurd priors. At absolute most what you've proven is that game theory kind of sucks