On reflection, I suspect that I’m struggling with the is-ought problem in the entire project. Physics is “is” and ethics is “ought”, and I’m very skeptical that “ethicophysics” is actually either, let alone a bridge between the two.
If you consult my recent shortform, I lay out a more measured, skeptical description of the project. Basically, ethicophysics constitutes a globally computable Schelling Point, such that it can be used as a protocol between different RL agents that believe in “oughts” to achieve Pareto-optimal outcomes. As long as the largest coalition agrees to prefer Jesus to Hitler, I think (and I need to do far more to back this up) defectors can be effectively reined in, the same way that Bitcoin works because the majority of the computers hooked up to it don’t want to destroy faith in the Bitcoin protocol.
On reflection, I suspect that I’m struggling with the is-ought problem in the entire project. Physics is “is” and ethics is “ought”, and I’m very skeptical that “ethicophysics” is actually either, let alone a bridge between the two.
That’s fair (strong up/agree vote).
If you consult my recent shortform, I lay out a more measured, skeptical description of the project. Basically, ethicophysics constitutes a globally computable Schelling Point, such that it can be used as a protocol between different RL agents that believe in “oughts” to achieve Pareto-optimal outcomes. As long as the largest coalition agrees to prefer Jesus to Hitler, I think (and I need to do far more to back this up) defectors can be effectively reined in, the same way that Bitcoin works because the majority of the computers hooked up to it don’t want to destroy faith in the Bitcoin protocol.