Hein de Haan

Sentientist and writer, interested in morality, decision & game theory, history, and all things math and science.

[Hein de Haan @Heighn]

A reply to @Benthamsbulldog.

https://t.co/I8Lb7VSNTP

[Hein de Haan @Heighn]

@marc__adler @DeivonDrago That does not get you time travel though, right?

[Hein de Haan @Heighn]

@fmgs31 @lmldias @robertskmiles @peach2k2 Are you familiar with Smoking Lesion?

[Hein de Haan @Heighn]

@corsaren @_AashishReddy "No matter what DT you use, it is always possible to construct a problem set up where being rational is punished, so that’s not really a flaw"

Is it? Is there one for FDT?

[Hein de Haan @Heighn]

Hot take: "Two-boxing is rational, but you should one-box" is a contradiction.

[corsaren @corsaren]

I do accept that, strictly speaking, it is rational to two-box and the design of Newcomb’s is such that it punishes rational actors.

But also, you should just one-box. There is no set of norms that cannot be undone by a demon hellbent on punishing you for following them.

[Hein de Haan @Heighn]

@NathanpmYoung It doesn't, actually. If the predictor models your decision procedure, the correct answer is to one-box in the problem as described.

[Hein de Haan @Heighn]

@fmgs31 @lmldias @robertskmiles @peach2k2 My point is that accuracy is not the only relevant factor here. The basis of the prediction matters as well.

[Hein de Haan @Heighn]

@fmgs31 @lmldias @robertskmiles @peach2k2 That actually matters a lot! If the predictor actually knows how you make your decision and bases her prediction on that (i.e. it models your decision procedure), then you should one-box. If she uses some correlating factor, it's just Smoking Lesion and you should two-box.

[Hein de Haan @Heighn]

@robertskmiles @lmldias @peach2k2 Yes, but this does depend on how the predictor makes her prediction. If she bases it on the color of your shoes (in a hypothetical world where wearing blue shoes strongly correlates with one-boxing) you should two-box, regardless of your shoe color.

[Hein de Haan @Heighn]

@xriskology Please demonstrate why utilitarianism leads to this conclusion.

Also, EA is not necessarily utilitarian in nature.

[Hein de Haan @Heighn]

@realtwitcourt "Klopt dat ik goed verdien". Precies, en dat is een van de redenen dat ik niet doneer: het deel van mijn geld dat ik doneer maakt elders een (veel) groter verschil.

[Hein de Haan @Heighn]

@PstafarianPrice @americnhumanist @gm_skeptic I'm trying to understand your point here. I mean, surely victims of (attempted) assassination can still be bad guys?

[Hein de Haan @Heighn]

@skdh Whether it makes intuitive sense also strongly depends on the interpretation. MWI makes much more sense to me (and is not at all counterintuitive to me) than the Copenhagen Interpretation.

[Hein de Haan @Heighn]

@davemotorcycle1 (And, of course, not only that: Masley claimed she should be purged from polite society.)

[Hein de Haan @Heighn]

@davemotorcycle1 The bigger point is not whether "don't associate with fascists" is a good norm; it's that Masley says Grimes went "full fascists" with his evidence being that she went to Yarvin's wedding and a party he attended.

[Hein de Haan @Heighn]

@davemotorcycle1 That is, had @AndyMasley just said that Grimes should not have gone to these events, this would have been a very different debate.

[Hein de Haan @Heighn]

@ilex_ulmus @NathanpmYoung Out of curiosity, what is your view regarding being friends with people who eat meat?

[Hein de Haan @Heighn]

@morallawwithin Fun fact: it's legal in the Netherlands.

[Hein de Haan @Heighn]

@lesgalapagos @xChessPuzzles Qe5 gives Ra4+.

[Hein de Haan @Heighn]

@Benthamsbulldog I think your EA writings are often inspiring. Your arguments for God are interesting but, I believe, ultimately incorrect. Your writings on Decision Theory seem quite confused, and you're (unknowingly) strawmanning FDT and being quite (over)confident about it.