Your view on how to rank outcomes may choose to include the subjective or principled judgement space of all other members to various degrees and on various condition. I must ask for YOUR outcome metric, since there is no optimum that could max out everyone's individual metric.
-
-
The basic assumption is that humans make rational choices under ideal conditions. Just ask the people who committed suicide after the 2007 stock market crash. Men aren't rational, conditions aren't ideal, people make a lot of bad choices.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @muralipiyer @JMoVS
Why not ask those people that did not commit suicide after the 2007 stock market crash instead?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Outcome is being defined by those who survive. There is an inherent bias built in.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @muralipiyer @JMoVS
Yes, and how do you judge that outcome, respectively?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
That's why we should work with the assumption that knowledge is not complete. If the system is not perfect, we can work with approximations and accept that we have to live with errors.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @muralipiyer @JMoVS
That is not an assumption, it is an obvious, provable fact. Given sufficient resources we will devote an appropriate part of our rationality to quantifying the uncertainty.
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
The assumption made here is that uncertainty is quantifiable. That piece of knowledge is what we should forego in the modelling. We will always lack full knowledge and complete resources.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @muralipiyer @JMoVS
The quantifiability of uncertainty is not an assumption, you can test and confirm that hypothesis, and also derive it a priori. The sentence "we will always lack full knowledge and complete resources" must have qualifiers because it depends on the context of what you model.
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
A counter example please
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Chess? — But even if you want to model the full range of interactions of a group of people, it is conceivable that you could one day buy enough compute to do a full take on all their sensory input and action space, and run an exhaustive simulation.
-
-
Unrealistic. Unless we just stick to games with known limited(finite or countably infinite ) outcomes. You remind me of some tv show in which it was argued that if all information about universe was captured, it won't fit in this universe. (or something like that...)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @muralipiyer @JMoVS
Of course it won't. But most of the information about our universe is very boring and redundant.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.