3 ms·
Even if it would be rational to change the probabilities one assigns to one’s future event space, that doesn’t mean one can’t commit to not considering such rea
by drdeca 2y ago
Even if it would be rational to change the probabilities one assigns to one’s future event space, that doesn’t mean one can’t commit to not considering such reasons.
Now, if it’s irrational to do so, then it’s irrational to do so, even though it is possible. But I’m not so sure it is irrational. If one is considering situations with things as powerful and oppositional as that, it seems like, unless one has a full solid theory of acausal trade ready and has shown that it is beneficial, that it is probably best to blanket refuse all acausal threats, so that they don’t influence what actually happens here.
- khafra 2y agoTo be precise, you should precommit to not trading with entities who threaten punishment--e.g. taking an action that costs them, simply because it also costs you. Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately, given how we would misuse such an ability), strong precommitments are not available to humans. Our ability to self-modify is vague and bounded. In our organizations and other intelligent tools, we probably should make such precommitments.