View Single Post
Old 01-22-2018, 02:34 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,697
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
Aumann's agreement theorem says that two people acting rationally (in a certain precise sense) and with common knowledge of each other's beliefs cannot agree to disagree. More specifically, if two people are genuine Bayesian rationalists with common priors, and if they each have common knowledge of their individual posterior probabilities, then their posteriors must be equal.

Once every sentient being is an AI or a human converted to a computer and has sufficient processing power, we will all have the same common set of data about the world and the adequate cognitive ability to converge on the same conclusions. In the more immediate future, we're mere years away from limited function data analysis tools that can augment human intelligence and thus produce the correct conclusions given the data.

I consider it a higher probability that "our" (me and the other members of the site) current analysis is closer to the one true correct analysis that "your" (you mentally challenged individuals in this thread) analysis. It's just a guess...but a rational one.

I know there are many fans of SamuelA in this thread (for a precise and ironic sense of the word "fans" ) so herewith an appreciation and tribute to the brilliance of SamuelA.

My first question would be what the fuck on God's green earth this has to do with anything that was being discussed, but never mind. SamuelA is on a roll, so let's take a look, because it's always fun.

We know from previous experience that SamuelA likes to plagiarize things out of Wikipedia and pass it off as his own, as he did with the definition of "computation", and, significantly, to do it without understanding it. He no doubt got the idea for this off-the-wall irrelevant grandstanding out of "LessWrong" because this is the kind of stuff they bloviate about, and thought he would pass off a cribbed Wikipedia entry here as a shining example of ... something. But what? His ability to cut and paste? His shameless plagiarizing?

Moreover, the substance of the "theorem" is pretty unenlightening because if one accepts the artificially constrained technical premises as precisely defined, then the theorem is self-evidently and trivially true. As the author himself stated, "We publish this paper with some diffidence, since once one has the appropriate framework, it is mathematically trivial." Or as Rational Wiki astutely opines, "Aumann's agreement theorem is the result of Nobel laureate Robert Aumann's groundbreaking 1976 discovery that a sufficiently respected game theorist can get anything into a peer-reviewed journal."

The problem, of course, is the presumption that everyone has access to the same perfect information and possesses the same perfect rationality, and implicitly has the same history and the same goals and values. It necessarily presumes that we have ceased to have any identity either as individuals or collectively as groups and have become identical machines, a perfectly plausible scenario in SamuelA's demented imaginary world, ignoring the fact that this is tantamount to saying we will have ceased to exist.

As Rational Wiki points out here, at its core this is nothing more than the truism that two calculators will give you the same answer to the same input. This is something that SamuelA can appreciate because I understand that he took (and passed!) a signals course, plus he knows how the brain works (it executes branch instructions!). In the real world -- the one that SamuelA has great difficulties with -- people have, and will always have, identities, goals, values, and self-interests. This is why we have politics and why different rational people come to entirely different conclusions based on exactly the same facts.

All this brilliance was apparently dredged out of the anal sphincter of LessWrong and seems to have impressed the beejesus out of SamuelA. Not surprisingly, Rational Wiki has a few choice words about them, too: "... very focused on an evil future artificial intelligence taking over the world. Some compare it to a circle-jerk of wordiness" and "... the community's focused demographic and narrow interests have also produced an insular culture that is heavy with its own peculiar jargon and established ideas that often conflict with science and reality." If they also celebrate cut-n-paste plagiarists and pompous bloviating blowhards, it will be the perfect place for our SamuelA and we wish him well, if only he would kindly bugger off and go there and become an imaginary hero in his own mind. We will miss the humor, but c'est la vie.

SamuelA, you embarrass yourself every time you post. Even your fantasies are epic fails.