Wow. We have extremely different beliefs on this front. IMO, almost nothing is retroactively funded, and even high-status prizes are a tiny percentage of anything.
Any workplace will tell you that of course they want to reward good work even after the fact,
No workplace that I know of DOES retroactively reward good work if the employee is no longer employed there. Most of the rhetoric about it is just signaling, in pursuit of retention and future productivity.
people will have the wrong decision-theory in the future sounds to me about as mistaken as saying that lots of people will disbelieve the theory of evolution in the future
It seems likely that they’ll accept evolution, and still not feel constrained by it, and pursue more directed and efficient anti-entropy measures. It also seems extremely likely that they’ll use a decision theory that actually works to place them in the universe they want, which may or may not include compassion for imaginary or past or otherwise causally-unreachable things.
(edit to clarify the decision-theory comment)
saying that people will have the wrong decision-theory in the future sounds to me about as mistaken as saying that lots of people will disbelieve the theory of evolution in the future.
It’s not clear that any likely decision theory, let alone a non-wrong one, requires fully-acausal beliefs or actions. Many of them do include a more complete causality diagram than CDT does, and many acknowledge the the point-of-decision is often much different than the apparent one. But they’re all basically consequentialist, in that they believe that actions can influence future states of the universe.
Wow. We have extremely different beliefs on this front. IMO, almost nothing is retroactively funded, and even high-status prizes are a tiny percentage of anything.
No workplace that I know of DOES retroactively reward good work if the employee is no longer employed there. Most of the rhetoric about it is just signaling, in pursuit of retention and future productivity.
It seems likely that they’ll accept evolution, and still not feel constrained by it, and pursue more directed and efficient anti-entropy measures. It also seems extremely likely that they’ll use a decision theory that actually works to place them in the universe they want, which may or may not include compassion for imaginary or past or otherwise causally-unreachable things.
(edit to clarify the decision-theory comment)
It’s not clear that any likely decision theory, let alone a non-wrong one, requires fully-acausal beliefs or actions. Many of them do include a more complete causality diagram than CDT does, and many acknowledge the the point-of-decision is often much different than the apparent one. But they’re all basically consequentialist, in that they believe that actions can influence future states of the universe.