--- Steve Richfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Matt, > > On 5/9/08, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > After many postings on this subject, I still assert that > > > > > ANY rational AGI would be religious. > > > > > > > > Not necessarily. You execute a program P that inputs the > conditions > > of > > > > the game and outputs "1 box" or "2 boxes". Omega executes a > program W > > > > as follows: > > > > > > > > if P outputs "1 box" > > > > then put $1 million in box B > > > > else > > > > leave box B empty. > > > > > > > > No matter what P is, it cannot call W because it would be infinite > > > > recursion. > > > > > > > > > QED this is NOT the program that Omega executes. > > > > No, it is given that Omega never makes a mistake. Please try again. > > > My point was that a program was advanced that had an obvious bug that > had been clearly identified - infinite recursion. Obviously our super > intelligent alien won't be using a program that suffers from such an > obvious > bug. Hence, the presence of this bug is proof that this is NOT the > program being used.
There is no bug in Omega. The only bug is in P if it believes that it can predict Omega's output with certainty or if it outputs "2 boxes". -- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=101455710-f059c4 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
