|
@OHaggstrom | |||||
|
Your question is impossible to do justice within a single tweet, but the NP touches on thorny issues in, e.g., rationality, the fundamentals of decision theory, causality, artificial intelligence and whether we might possibly be living in a computer simulation.
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Olle Häggström
@OHaggstrom
|
25. sij |
|
I wonder what percentage of self-proclaimed one-boxers are actually one-boxers at heart, as opposed to merely trying to trick future superintelligent Newcomb organizers.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Magnus Borgh 🇪🇺🇬🇧🇸🇪
@SpinVector
|
26. sij |
|
Amazingly, this is the first time I have encountered Newcomb’s Paradox. Is there a succinct way of explaining why it is an interesting problem? I understand it’s formulation, but fail, as yet, to see the significance beyond illustrating importance of hidden assumptions.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Magnus Borgh 🇪🇺🇬🇧🇸🇪
@SpinVector
|
26. sij |
|
Fair enough, I was afraid so. Is there somewhere (preferably easily accessible, e.g. online) where I can get an overview explanation? I read the Wikipedia entry, but that didn’t really explain *why* NP is interesting for any of those things, how NP might tell us something useful.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Olle Häggström
@OHaggstrom
|
26. sij |
|
The introductory chapter to this book does roughly what you ask for: cambridge.org/core/books/new…
(Note, however, that there is reasonable room for disagreement of whether or not NP actually IS interesting and useful.)
|
||
|
|
||