# Re: A profound lack of profundity

```
On 04 Aug 2017, at 01:14, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:```
```
```
```On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 2:50 AM, Stathis Papaioannou

```
​>> ​I already know a rat will try to solve a maze to get food so I'll take that part of the bet, but I'm not sure what "​proportion of the number of attempts​" means or what the experimental setup would be to test it.
```
```
​> ​I meant to write "as a proportion of the number of attempts". In the experiment as it would normally be done, there is a certain probability that the rat will get a reward per attempt. It might turn out, for example, that if the rat gets a reward at least 30% of the time it will learn to repeat the behavior, but less than this it won't. The equivalent experiment with the duplicator is that multiple copies of the rat are made and a proportion of the copies get a reward.
```
```
​I am quite certain whatever rat behavior that is observed without using the rat duplicating machine the exact same behavior will be observed with it. ​So what on earth is the point of introducing a rat duplicating machine into ​this thought experiment?
```
```
​> ​One would expect that the copies that have a memory of getting a reward 30% of the time or more will learn to repeat the behaviour.
```
```
If a rat remembers it got a reward 30% of the time that's all the information we need, it's irrelevant​ ​if a rat duplicating ​ machine ​was used or not. And the rat is able to know it got a reward 30% of the time some event happened​ ​because the rat can remember the past so the rat always knows for sure if he got the reward or not.​ ​But the rat can not do the same thing for the future because the rat can not remember the future, so to figure out what to do next the only thing it can do is use induction which works more ​often than it doesn't. I doubt if a rat understands what 30% means but it probably can have some sort intuitive feeling that a certain action is worth the effort or not. And a​ ​rat duplicating machine​ i​s a fifth wheel in all this serving no purpose.
```
```
​> ​the rats cannot distinguish between a single stream of experience with probabilistic outcomes
```
```
​Copying machines or not, looking into the past a person or a rat can always remembers one unique path of experience
```

On 4 August 2017 at 03:06, John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
```
​I am quite certain whatever rat behavior that is observed without using the rat duplicating machine the exact same behavior will be observed with it. ​So what on earth is the point of introducing a rat duplicating machine into ​this thought experiment?
```
```
​> ​One would expect that the copies that have a memory of getting a reward 30% of the time or more will learn to repeat the behaviour.
```
```
If a rat remembers it got a reward 30% of the time that's all the information we need, it's irrelevant​ ​if a rat duplicating ​ machine ​was used or not. And the rat is able to know it got a reward 30% of the time some event happened​ ​because the rat can remember the past so the rat always knows for sure if he got the reward or not.​ ​But the rat can not do the same thing for the future because the rat can not remember the future, so to figure out what to do next the only thing it can do is use induction which works more ​often than it doesn't. I doubt if a rat understands what 30% means but it probably can have some sort intuitive feeling that a certain action is worth the effort or not. And a​ ​rat duplicating machine​ i​s a fifth wheel in all this serving no purpose.
```
```
​> ​the rats cannot distinguish between a single stream of experience with probabilistic outcomes
```
```
​Copying machines or not, looking into the past a person or a rat can always remembers one unique path of experience​, and in the past we can know (at least in theory) that a event either happened or it did not with no need to insert ​a "maybe". But we can't do any of that with the future, if we could then we couldn't tell the difference between the past and the future, but we can.
```
```
You seem to agree that it's obvious the duplicating machine won't make a difference. This has been the whole point of the discussion: looking forward to a 30% probability of a certain outcome without duplication is equivalent (subjectively and behaviourally) to looking forward to being copied multiple times with 30% of the copies experiencing that outcome, whether you are a rat or a human.
```
```
```
```
I waited for John Clark to reply on this, but that was a formidable checkmate. Actually. Very well done.
```
Bruno

```
```

--
Stathis Papaioannou

--
```
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
```To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
```
```
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email