Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Test your “free will” at the Aaronson Oracle

people.ischool.berkeley.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 240 posts

Re: Test your “free will” at the Aaronson Oracle

#171

Post by drdeca »

etjossem wrote: post #138
jonathanyc wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether or not determinism and free will are compatible is a very intricate debate that your throwaway remark doesn't do justice to. Look up Compatibilism.

Also, Determinism (philosophy) != deterministic (computing) The former is the metaphysical idea that all events are causally linked, a belief which we can never confirm or refute. The latter describes something's observable degree of predictability. They're not related concepts at all. This demo has nothing to do with free will, Determinism, or Compatibilism - but it's an interesting study in predictability.

Is the distinction roughly "causally determined" vs "logically determined" ?

If we are talking about an abstract computing device, and whether it is deterministic, we mean whether its next state is always uniquely logically determined by the current state, correct?

Hmm, if an abstract machine behaves in a way that is uniquely logically determined, but which is not computable, do we consider such machines to be deterministic? I would think so, but I am not sure. We would be unable to predict it, does that make it not deterministic(computing) ?

Re: Test your “free will” at the Aaronson Oracle

#172

Post by etjossem »

roadnottaken wrote: post #168
iammer wrote: post #157

This sequence gives a score of 0: f f f f f f d f f f f f f d d f f f f d f d f f f d f f d f f f f f f d d d f f f d d f d f f d d f f d f d d f f f f d f d f d f f f d f f d f f f f f f d d d d f f d d d f d f d d d f f f d d f d d f d f f d d f f d f d d f f f f d f d f d f f f d f f d f f f f f f d d d d d f d d d d f f d d d f d f d d d f f f d d f d d f d f f d d f f d f d d f f f f d f d f d f f f d f f d f f…

Explain?

The carefully crafted (non-random) sequence above tries to fake out the script and succeeds every time. It reveals the script's own predictability, and why you shouldn't rely on it too much as a yardstick for testing your brain's psuedo-randomness.

Re: Test your “free will” at the Aaronson Oracle

#174

Post by SilasX »

knodi123 wrote: post #116
DanielStraight wrote: post #92

You can use its own output against it. (Which means, ironically, it does not follow "know thyself", a maxim said to be from the Oracle at Delphi.) Fixate on a number fairly late in the sequence (the millionths place seems to work well). If that number is 5-9, push 'f'. Otherwise, push 'd'. Keeps it pretty consistently around 0.5.

"To maximize your free will, press the key that the robot tells you to."

"I can do whatever I want! See, I do exactly what the n-th digit of pi says to!"

Re: Test your “free will” at the Aaronson Oracle

#175

Post by drdeca »

visarga wrote: post #129
grondilu wrote: post #101

Being predictable does not mean you have no free will. I mean, ever heard of compatibilism ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibilism

From a physical point of view, free will doesn't make sense. Laws are deterministic at macro level and contain some randomness at the lower level. Neither are free will. Also, there is a huge assumption there - the assumption that there is a "self" that can have this free will. There is no self, just a stream of experiences and actions. The "self" is an intuitive concept, a reification that is useful in social dealin…

From a physical point of view, what are experiences?

Re: Test your “free will” at the Aaronson Oracle

#177

Post by tgb »

Flimm wrote: post #148

It got to 1 immediately and stayed at 1 no matter what I did. Either this is a very impressive future predicting machine or there's a bug. .... Turns out it was because I was pressing the wrong buttons on my Dvorak layout keyboard!

This makes sense. The only reason you'd use Dvorak is if you had no free will!

Re: Test your “free will” at the Aaronson Oracle

#178

Post by muti »

roadnottaken wrote: post #168
iammer wrote: post #157

This sequence gives a score of 0: f f f f f f d f f f f f f d d f f f f d f d f f f d f f d f f f f f f d d d f f f d d f d f f d d f f d f d d f f f f d f d f d f f f d f f d f f f f f f d d d d f f d d d f d f d d d f f f d d f d d f d f f d d f f d f d d f f f f d f d f d f f f d f f d f f f f f f d d d d d f d d d d f f d d d f d f d d d f f f d d f d d f d f f d d f f d f d d f f f f d f d f d f f f d f f d f f…

Explain?

You can generate a sequence like this if you can see what the program thinks your next input will be, and choosing different.

It's fairly easy to debug/modify the javascript to do this

Re: Test your “free will” at the Aaronson Oracle

#179

Post by Netcob »

When I get to look at the average I can keep it under 0.5 if I change the key every time the number goes up (and I keep pressing the same key if that strategy stops working).

As arguments against free will go... I think people with no short-term memory make a pretty solid case. You'd think with all the complex activity in our brains we'd at least behave a little randomly based on some chaotic processes, but without your short-term memory you begin to sound like a broken record.

Re: Test your “free will” at the Aaronson Oracle

#180

Post by maxander »

snikeris wrote: post #81
zzrg wrote: post #65

When I was little (and had too much free time) I memorized many digits of some transcendental numbers. The only (semi)practical use I've found for that knowledge, is that I can use it as a reasonably good pseudorandom stream. If for some reason I have to choose things pseudorandomly. Pick an arbitrary starting point in pi, and press 'd' for even digits and 'f' for odd digits, I get around 0.49 accuracy with this orac…

Haha, I did the same thing! From memory: 3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197969399375105 Now, the interesting question, how accurate is my recollection after all these years? Ack, one digit off!

If a transcendental number is imperfectly remembered, are its digits thereby less random?
Post reply on HN