Posts
Comments
I'm sorry I haven't commented here earlier, I've been getting the emails but I think blog comment threads are a poor way of communications, here are some points that I wished I had made earlier but may still have some validity.
I don't like Saturday for the following reasons: 1) It will be easy to round up a bunch of people for dinner and discussion after the summit is over without any online correspondance. Last year I hung around (whatever the hosting building was) for a while after the event had died down and Peter Voss, Sam Adams and about 10 other people and I went to a nearby restaurant. It wasn't that difficult to organize at all, it happened almost spontaneously.
2) My brain will be fried after listening to all the speakers that are lined up, thinking about what they said will lessen my ability to hold high level intellectual conversation, I'd prefer to have some personal time to reflect on the speakers before charging into a discussion.
My proposed solution: get everyone's email and move this conversation to that medium, yeah it will lead to a lot of extra emails but it would be easier than scrolling through a bunch of blog comments every now and then, most people check their email everyday but do not check the comments here everyday. Mike says we have 20 people but in the email I received from him had only eight names on it.
Willing to do either role under two conditions: 1) No money is at stake. 2) No time maximum or minimum.
Email freesuperintelligence@gmail.com if you're interested, we can set up something next week.
Eliezer, can you clarify what you mean by "You'll note that I don't try to modestly say anything like, "Well, I may not be as brilliant as Jaynes or Conway, but that doesn't mean I can't do important things in my chosen field."
Because I do know... that's not how it works."
It's clear that in the "true" prisoner it is better to defect. The frustrating thing about the other prisoner's dilemma is that some people use it to imply that it is better to defect in real life. The problem is that the prisoner's dilemma is a drastic oversimplification of reality. To make it more realistic you'd have to make it iterated amongst a person's social network, add a memory and a perception of the other player's actions, change the payoff matrix depending on the relationship between the players etc etc.
This versions shows cases in which defection has a higher expected value for both players, but it's more contrived and unlikely to come into existence than the other prisoner's dilemma.