FWIW, I’m seeing his point better than I’m seeing yours at the moment, and I found uninverted’s argument convincing until I read Wei_Dai’s response. Try being more explicit?
I can’t get all that much more explicit. It’s near the level of raw logic and the ‘conclusion you suggest’ is included as a direct quote in case there was any doubt. Let’s see.
AI don’t want to be a really big integer! BIf you had to choose between being a really big integer and a really big negative integer, you’d be pretty much indifferent.
B is not implied by A.
I would have replaced my (grandparent) comment with the phrase ‘non sequitur’ except I wanted to acknowledge that Wei_Dai is almost certainly considering related issues beyond the conclusion he actually offered.
B is implied by “C Being any integer is of no value.” which I took as an unspoken assumption that’s shared between uninverted and I (and I thought it was likely that he accepts this assumption based on A). Does that answer your criticism, or not?
C seems likely to me based on A only if I assume D(uninverted is silly). That’s because there are other beliefs that could make one claim A that are more coherent than C. But let’s ignore this little side track and just state what we (probably) all agree on:
Being a positive integer isn’t particularly desirable.
Wireheading, orgasmium and positive floating point numbers or representations of 3(as many carats as fit in the galaxy here)3 are considered equivalent to ‘positive integer’ for most intents and purposes.
Being a negative integer is even worse than being a positive integer.
Being an integer at all is not that great.
Just being entropy sounds worse than just being a positive integer.
The universe ending up the same as if you weren’t in it at all sounds worse than being a positive integer. (Depending on intuitive aversion to oblivion and torment some would say worse than being any sort of integer.)
If we disagree on these statements then that will actually be interesting. And it is quite possible that there is disagreement even on these. I’ve often been surprised when people have different intuitions than I expect.
The force of the argument “I don’t want to be a really big integer” is that “being wireheaded takes away what makes me me, and so I stop being a person I can identify with and become a really big integer”. If that were so, the same would apply to anti-wireheading, and Wei Dai’s question would apply. If you agree that wireheading is more desirable than anti-wireheading, then this and other arguments that it’s not more desirable than any other state don’t directly apply.
FWIW, I’m seeing his point better than I’m seeing yours at the moment, and I found uninverted’s argument convincing until I read Wei_Dai’s response. Try being more explicit?
I can’t get all that much more explicit. It’s near the level of raw logic and the ‘conclusion you suggest’ is included as a direct quote in case there was any doubt. Let’s see.
A I don’t want to be a really big integer!
B If you had to choose between being a really big integer and a really big negative integer, you’d be pretty much indifferent.
B is not implied by A.
I would have replaced my (grandparent) comment with the phrase ‘non sequitur’ except I wanted to acknowledge that Wei_Dai is almost certainly considering related issues beyond the conclusion he actually offered.
B is implied by “C Being any integer is of no value.” which I took as an unspoken assumption that’s shared between uninverted and I (and I thought it was likely that he accepts this assumption based on A). Does that answer your criticism, or not?
C seems likely to me based on A only if I assume D (uninverted is silly). That’s because there are other beliefs that could make one claim A that are more coherent than C. But let’s ignore this little side track and just state what we (probably) all agree on:
Being a positive integer isn’t particularly desirable.
Wireheading, orgasmium and positive floating point numbers or representations of 3(as many carats as fit in the galaxy here)3 are considered equivalent to ‘positive integer’ for most intents and purposes.
Being a negative integer is even worse than being a positive integer.
Being an integer at all is not that great.
Just being entropy sounds worse than just being a positive integer.
The universe ending up the same as if you weren’t in it at all sounds worse than being a positive integer. (Depending on intuitive aversion to oblivion and torment some would say worse than being any sort of integer.)
Fun is better than orgasmic integerness.
If we disagree on these statements then that will actually be interesting. And it is quite possible that there is disagreement even on these. I’ve often been surprised when people have different intuitions than I expect.
The force of the argument “I don’t want to be a really big integer” is that “being wireheaded takes away what makes me me, and so I stop being a person I can identify with and become a really big integer”. If that were so, the same would apply to anti-wireheading, and Wei Dai’s question would apply. If you agree that wireheading is more desirable than anti-wireheading, then this and other arguments that it’s not more desirable than any other state don’t directly apply.
If we take the alternative reasonable interpretation “takes away almost everything what makes me me”, no contradiction appears.
Yes, that makes sense.
I reject this combination of words and maintain my previous position.