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

211–220 of 279 posts

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

#211

Post by r3trohack3r »

EricMausler wrote: post #177
xattt wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is an exercise of free will to overcome the imposed barriers of some test.

Does it count if you allow the test to be accurate but you still maintain control over when it is wrong? I just spammed F and randomly hit D and it pretty much never predicted the D. Which I think captures a fundamental flaw in algorithms vs humans. Humans know how to mask their signals within noise. I'm inclined to believe the generalization that algorithms that aim for accuracy are highly susceptible to being manip…

“Always do F, so they’ll never expect D of you”

I think this is a sound strategy for “getting away with it” in society.

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

#213

Post by earthboundkid »

BurningFrog wrote: post #204
karmakaze wrote: post #128

In what way is being unpredictable considered "free will"? Of course it's just being clickbaity but worth mentioning. I've seen this better used to show that humans are poor sources of randomness. Is there a difference between non-determinism and a free will choice? The latter seems to be a contradiction. A choice implies a reason which would be a cause, thus determinism. This test is asking to make random 'choices'.…

The core of most confusion in the "free will" philosophical debates is that the "free will" concept is undefined, and people assume many different unspoken such definitions when debating it.

That was Hume's position, but we're still arguing even after he set out his definitions. :-)

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

#215

Post by gjsman-1000 »

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}{…

Even better; if you just type the first 7 blocks:

ddddd dfddd dffdd dfdfd ddfff ddfdd fdffd

That's only 10%.

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

#216

Post by miika »

anon-3988 wrote: post #52
miika wrote: post #22

The question is never if we have free will or not. The question is if we are in a state where free will is available or not. For example, when I’m aware that there is space around myself, then I’m also aware that there are thoughts, feeling in the body, breath etc. In this state, I believe, it’s possible to choose. In this test I can choose the only press the other key and this algorithm doesn’t do so well. Then some…

If I ask you to choose A or B, and let you take as long as you want to make this decision, at the point where you make the decision, you still have no idea why you chose what you chose. It is ultimately mysterious to you and anyone else why you chose what you chose. If you had any reasoning, it is still mysterious why that reasoning caused you to choose what you chose and why it didn't have the opposite effect? The i…

You say “if I ask you to choose” but if there is no free will then I cannot choose.

Also if there is no free will then we cannot judge anyone, no matter what they did, because they didn’t have choice.

Actually my argument is that the best evidence for free will is that the world is such a mess. Without free will we would live in perfect harmony with nature, like all the other species do. We are so free that we can even deny the existence of our freedom, hence avoid taking responsibility of our actions.

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

#219

Post by kubanczyk »

gnramires wrote: post #116
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…

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…

One step back please, the "free will" was an ill-conceived start. The core claim is about how random is human will. Throwing in the word "free" adds confusion.

The will of an addict is a bit less random, okay. Is there anything quantitative going on here besides "some stuff can increase randomness" and "some other stuff can decrease randomness"?

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

#220

Post by photochemsyn »

It's easy to get 50% by flipping a coin or rolling a die. Choosing to use this method is an example of free will overcoming determinism.

As far as why humans are natural pattern-generators, music is illustrative. If timing and frequency are random, that's not enjoyable music. Probably has something to do with resonance and the fundamentals of neuron biochemistry, e.g. the neuronal recharge time after firing, etc. This seems to be a general feature of evolution, look at squid color patterns or reproductive timing in algae and so on. It's probably a fundamental feature of all living systems, and could be linked to astronomical phenomenon, orbital parameters and light/dark cycles, and even down to subatomic processes, in which oscillation is always going on - but at this level, true randomness seems to exist in various processes like the timing of nuclear decays in a sample of matter. This inherent randomness at the root of everything seems quite real - hence, free will exists. I guess.

Post reply on HN