Re: SSA and game theory (was: self-sampling assumption is incorrect)

2002-07-18 Thread Wei Dai
Here's my response to the rest of your post. I think you're right that with two identical deterministic computations, there is no need to apply game theory. I think in that case you should consider yourself to be both of them. It would not work to think there's 50% chance you're one and 50%

Re: SSA and game theory (was: self-sampling assumption is incorrect)

2002-07-17 Thread Wei Dai
On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 06:58:50PM -0700, Hal Finney wrote: I am confused about the relation of S to A and B. Did S go into a copying machine and get two copies, A and B made, in addition to S? And now A and B are deciding what S will win? Yes, and yes. Why should they care? If S gets a

Re: SSA and game theory (was: self-sampling assumption is incorrect)

2002-07-17 Thread Hal Finney
Wei wrote: Here's a simplified thought experiment that illustrates the issue. Two copies of the subject S, A and B, are asked to choose option 1 or option 2. If A chooses 1, S wins a TV (TV), otherise S wins a worse TV (TV2). If B chooses 1, S wins a stereo, otherwise S wins TV. S prefers

Re: SSA and game theory (was: self-sampling assumption is incorrect)

2002-07-17 Thread Wei Dai
On Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 06:49:04PM -0700, Hal Finney wrote: OK, I understand now that the utilities below are the utilities for A and B when S gets the various items. So U(TV) is the utility for A for S to get a TV, which is the same as the utility for B since they are identical copies.

Re: SSA and game theory (was: self-sampling assumption is incorrect)

2002-07-16 Thread Hal Finney
Wei writes: Here's a simplified thought experiment that illustrates the issue. Two copies of the subject S, A and B, are asked to choose option 1 or option 2. If A chooses 1, S wins a TV (TV), otherise S wins a worse TV (TV2). If B chooses 1, S wins a stereo, otherwise S wins TV. S prefers

Re: self-sampling assumption is incorrect

2002-07-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Wei Dai, About books. Concerning the provability logics I always mentionned the Boolos 1993 (or even his lovely lighter Boolos 1979), but I would like to mention also the book Self-reference and modal logic by Smorynski. The only problem is its very little caracters; I should go to the

Re: self-sampling assumption is incorrect

2002-06-27 Thread Wei Dai
were to compete with his copies you would be at a disadvantage. P.S. I retract my claim that the self-sampling assumption is incorrect. I think I was just using it incorrectly. More on this in another post.

Re: self-sampling assumption is incorrect

2002-06-15 Thread Wei Dai
After writing the following response, I realized that my argument against the self sampling assumption doesn't really depend on E1 and E2 being experiences. They can be any kind of events. Suppose they're prizes that the copies can win for the original. E1 is a TV and E2 is a stereo. You'd