2009/3/11 Wei Dai wei...@weidai.com:
Jack Mallah wrote:
They might not, but I'm sure most would; maybe not exactly that U, but a
lot closer to it.
Can you explain why you believe that?
No. In U = Sum_i M_i Q_i, you sum over all the i's, not just the ones
that are similar to you. Of
Jack Mallah wrote:
They might not, but I'm sure most would; maybe not exactly that U, but a
lot closer to it.
Can you explain why you believe that?
No. In U = Sum_i M_i Q_i, you sum over all the i's, not just the ones
that are similar to you. Of course your Q_i (which is _your_ utility
Jack,
You say Q_i (which is _your_ utility per unit measure for the observer i).
This is an oxymoron. How can observer i know or care what YOUR Q
(Quality) is? How can this observer feel what it feels being you?. The
only observer that matters in evaluating your Q is you as a
self-observer.
2009/3/9 Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
2009/3/8 Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com:
And if it went to zero you certainly wouldn't know and wouldn't care.
If I died I wouldn't be around to know or care, but I would care in
anticipation of dying,
2009/3/9 Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote:
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
2009/3/8 Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com:
And if it went to zero you certainly wouldn't know and wouldn't care.
If I died I wouldn't be around to know or care, but I would care in
anticipation of dying,
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
2009/3/8 Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com:
And if it went to zero you certainly wouldn't know and wouldn't care.
If I died I wouldn't be around to know or care, but I would care in
anticipation of dying, since it would radically alter my future
experiences
--- On Fri, 3/6/09, Wei Dai wei...@weidai.com wrote:
No. First, I don't agree that the real question is what the utility
function is or should be. The real question is whether the measure, M, is
conserved or whether it decreases. It's just that a lot of people don't
understand what
Stathis, Brent,
There are two copies of me in perfect lockstep, A1 and A2. I'm one of
these copies and not the other (though I don't know which). Suppose
I'm A1 and I decide to teleport 100km away. That means A1 disappears
and a new copy, B, appears 100m away. I'm happy, since I feel I've
2009/3/8 Jack Mallah jackmal...@yahoo.com wrote:
It's not the addition then loss that's bad (since you end up with the same
measure you started with); it's the loss.
In the culling teleportation, both people are lost, which is doubly bad.
Elsewhere, one new person appears, which is good,
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
2009/3/8 Jack Mallah jackmal...@yahoo.com wrote:
It's not the addition then loss that's bad (since you end up with the same
measure you started with); it's the loss.
In the culling teleportation, both people are lost, which is doubly bad.
Elsewhere, one new
2009/3/8 Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com:
And if it went to zero you certainly wouldn't know and wouldn't care.
If I died I wouldn't be around to know or care, but I would care in
anticipation of dying, since it would radically alter my future
experiences by eliminating them. On the other
2009/3/6 Jack Mallah jackmal...@yahoo.com wrote:
If you're not worried about the fair trade, then to be consistent you
shouldn't be worried about the unfair trade either. In the fair trade, one
version of you A disappears overnight, and a new version of you B is created
elsewhere in the
At 07:31 AM 3/6/2009, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
2009/3/6 Jack Mallah jackmal...@yahoo.com wrote:
If you're not worried about the fair trade,
then to be consistent you shouldn't be worried
about the unfair trade either. In the fair
trade, one version of you A disappears
overnight, and
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
2009/3/6 Jack Mallah jackmal...@yahoo.com wrote:
If you're not worried about the fair trade, then to be consistent you
shouldn't be worried about the unfair trade either. In the fair trade, one
version of you A disappears overnight, and a new version of you B is
Which I? Aren't you concerned that you would press the button - and vanish?
Brent
The psychological continuer - the one who remembers having pressed the
button but with +5 dollars on his account.
@Stathis: would you really do this (press the button, also in the
absoute measure scenario)?
No. First, I don't agree that the real question is what the utility
function is or should be. The real question is whether the measure, M, is
conserved or whether it decreases. It's just that a lot of people don't
understand what that means.
I agree that a lot of people don't
2009/3/7 Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com:
I don't agree with the way you calculate utility at all. If I got $5
every time I pressed a button which decreased my absolute measure in
the multiverse a millionfold I would happily press the button all day.
Which I? Aren't you concerned that
2009/2/25 Jack Mallah jackmal...@yahoo.com:
1) The fair trade
This is the teleportation or Star Trek transporter thought experiment. A
person is disintegrated, while a physically identical copy is created
elsewhere.
Even on Star Trek, not everyone was comfortable with doing this. The
--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, this seems to be the real point of disagreement between you and the
pro-QI people. If I am one of the extra versions and die overnight, but the
original survives, then I have survived. This is why there can be a many to
I noticed someone taking my name in vain. ;) (though experiment where
I, Tom, am a clone of Will Riker) The magic of thought experiments,
it's amazing. I felt my measure decrease, but only after I read the
thought experiment.
I trust this will not derail anyone's personal identity here, but I
Jack, welcome back. I no longer read every post here, but I read this post
and found your positions pretty close to my own. This one, especially, I
totally agree with:
The important thing to realize is that _definitions don't matter_!
Predictions, decisions, appropriate emotions to a
Jack, Wei Dai,
machines are invented, there will be a much greater selection pressure
towards U=M*Q. But given that U=Q is closer to the reality today, I'm not
sure what good it would do to taking a stand against QS/QI.
To translate:
U=M*Q is 3rd person POV (hypothetical; viewed from
22 matches
Mail list logo
