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

Can you use your "free will"? Try your hand

people.ischool.berkeley.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 279 posts

Re: Can you use your "free will"? Try your hand

#181

Post by GTP »

lupire wrote: post #141
GTP wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although I do believe we have free will, I don't agree with this specific example: looking at the algorithm used to predict key presses and just doing the opposite of what would the algorithm predicts, is letting the algorithm tell you what to do. This is related to inverse psychology.

How do you define free will?

I say that I have free will because my decisions come from myself and not from something outside me. Sure, the context in which I live can influence my decisions, but the final choice is mine and it can happen that I take a decision that goes against what the context (society, family etc.) would expect from me.

Re: Can you use your "free will"? Try your hand

#182

Post by otabdeveloper4 »

eigenket wrote: post #51
otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free will is equivalent to randomness with many (asymptotically infinite) degrees of freedom. Not sure if the experiment tests this. (Pressing a different key or closing the browser tab are also variables in this probability distribution.)

> Free will is equivalent to randomness with many (asymptotically infinite) degrees of freedom. I don't think this is obviously true. I can make a random number generating device with as many degrees of freedom as you like by producing a bunch of vertically polarised photons and measuring their horizontal polarisation. I don't think anyone would describe this system as having "free will". Conversely humans with "free…

> I can make a random number generating device with as many degrees of freedom as you like by producing a bunch of vertically polarised photons and measuring their horizontal polarisation.

Unless I misunderstand you, this is simply not true. Your device will be exceedingly easy to model, it's just a simple sum of i.i.d. random variables and subject to central limit theorems. (While humans definitely aren't.)

Re: Can you use your "free will"? Try your hand

#183

Post by otabdeveloper4 »

vidarh wrote: post #92
otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free will is any random process with an asymptotically infinite number of degrees of freedom, by definition. Are humans such a process? Who knows, but attempts to model individual humans have certainly failed before. (We need lots of humans in aggregate to successfully model them, once the central limit theorem starts working.)

I challenge you to get any more than a single digit percent of any representative sample of people to agree a random process is free will by definition. It's one of exceedingly few definitions I've heard in decades of discussing the subject that I'll agree doesn't immediately make free will impossible, but at the same time it's one that too me at least exemplifies something that is neither free nor will.

If you want to talk about "free will" rigorously, you need to consider the human being as a random process.

Re: Can you use your "free will"? Try your hand

#184

Post by naasking »

prometheus76 wrote: post #138
gnramires wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's true, I think free will is more reason (of the general kind that's not only logical but takes into account your mind), than more randomness . Rather, the more your actions are aligned with your own good, brought by understanding yourself and reality, the more free I think you are. (to give an example: is an addicted person free, even if he is in principle doing "what he wants?", or is he trapped by his…

I don't agree that reason correlates with free will. Many people act irrationally. Behavioral economics was developed because "rational actor" predictions applied to large groups of people turned out to be consistently incorrect. One can willfully be irrational. I do agree with you though, that free will doesn't necessarily mean "doing what I want" (which is a libertarian principle from the French Revolution), but in…

> One can willfully be irrational.

Don't confuse "having reasons" with "being rational". Free will is a freedom to act according to your internal reasons, with that process of deliberation over your reasons being responsive to various types of feedback. Those reasons don't have to be rational.

Re: Can you use your "free will"? Try your hand

#185

Post by naasking »

munksbeer wrote: post #148
eigenket wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Free will is equivalent to randomness with many (asymptotically infinite) degrees of freedom. I don't think this is obviously true. I can make a random number generating device with as many degrees of freedom as you like by producing a bunch of vertically polarised photons and measuring their horizontal polarisation. I don't think anyone would describe this system as having "free will". Conversely humans with "free…

> Free will seems to be qualitatively different to randomness. There is no such thing as free will, so any attempt to define it will fail. If we naively define it as something that isn't just pure randomness, but also something that isn't pure causality, then what is it? Either things are causal, in which case, you can replay everything and arrive at the same point. That doens't fit an intuitive definition of free wi…

> If we naively define it as something that isn't just pure randomness, but also something that isn't pure causality, then what is it?

Read up on Compatibilism. Free will can be defined in a way that's compatible with determinism. A deliberation over values resulting in a justification for a choice, aka "reasons" or "will". When you are "free" to act in accordance with those reasons, ie. you haven't been coerced into acting against your own reasons, then you've made a choice of your own free will. Simple and totally compatible with determinism.

Re: Can you use your "free will"? Try your hand

#186

Post by mapcars »

GTP wrote: post #181
lupire wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you define free will?

I say that I have free will because my decisions come from myself and not from something outside me. Sure, the context in which I live can influence my decisions, but the final choice is mine and it can happen that I take a decision that goes against what the context (society, family etc.) would expect from me.

The context part is clear but how do you define "myself"? :)

Re: Can you use your "free will"? Try your hand

#187

Post by naasking »

yreg wrote: post #103
ozim wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it true? From my point of view, that someone can predict what I will do from past behavior does not imply I don't have a free will. Only way that would prove I don't have a free will is someone who would predict my behavior without knowing anything about my past, like a fortune teller that would tell my friend (because if fortune teller tells it to me it might be self fulfilling prophecy :D) something I would do;…

I think it is true. If something could predict all your actions with 100% certainty then you have no free will - you have no ability to decide for a different outcome than the one that is predetermined. Although if it wasn't like that and you could do truly random decisions, I'm not sure what that says about your free will either. If I had to guess, I don't think I have a free will. In my opinion my actions are a det…

> I think it is true. If something could predict all your actions with 100% certainty then you have no free will

No, it's not true. Read up on Compatibilism for a definition of free will that's compatible with determinism.

Re: Can you use your "free will"? Try your hand

#189

Post by mapcars »

lupire wrote: post #147
raincole wrote: post #19

I fail to see how it's related to free will. I can look at the digits of PI and press d and f depending it's odd or even. So what does it prove? Nothing. Being able to beat this algorithm doesn't mean that I have free will, and choose to fall into patterns (knowing the PI solution exists) doesn't mean I don't.

It's a simple example that defeats a naive adversary trying to prove their free will. It's easy to create a more complex example to defeat a more advanced adversary. (Many exist.)

It doesn't actually, if it goes lower than 100% it means the prediction failed already.

Re: Can you use your "free will"? Try your hand

#190

Post by mcv »

omoikane wrote: post #13

The prediction algorithm is actually very straightforward[1]. It's a fun exercise to write a sequence generator specifically to defeat it. Here is a sequence that can get the prediction rate down to 13%: ddddd dfddd dffdd dfdfd ddfff ddfdd fdffd dffdf ddfff fdfdf dfffd ffdff fffff dffff ffddf fffdf dfffd ffdff ffffd ddfff Generated using this Perl script: my %table = (); my $s = "fffff"; for(my $i = 0; $i $table{$s}{…

Are you saying you just automated free will in such a simple algorithm?
Post reply on HN