From: Jef Allbright (jef@jefallbright.net)
Date: Thu Nov 01 2007 - 15:28:54 MDT
On 11/1/07, Wei Dai <weidai@weidai.com> wrote:
> Suppose an SI wants to do something with a very small, but non-zero
> probability, say 0 < p <= 1/3^^^3 (in Knuth's up-arrow notation). How would
> it go about doing this? The answer seems to be "it can't", because
> algorithmic information theory says there is no way that it can generate a
> sufficiently long random number that it can know is truly random. Can anyone
> see a way around this limitation?
>
> This problem came up in the context of Eliezer's "Torture vs. Dust Specks"
> dilemma (http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/10/torture-vs-dust.html), but I
> think it might be of interest outside that context.
I understand what you're asking, but this doesn't work on so many
levels...it reminds me of the jokes about the differences between
mathematicians and engineers.
It's pragmatic, semiotic, epistemic nonsense, but never-ending fun for
platonists.
- Jef
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:59 MDT