What kind of girl do you think I am? • Hacker News Board

Re: What kind of girl do you think I am?

#71

Post by ErrantX » Sun, Jun 06, 2010, 2:10 PM UTC

drewcrawford wrote: post #69

ErrantX wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. Actually the question does still hold interest IMO because it forces her to acknowledge to herself that she may have a price. You say: In reality, most people have made that choice long ago and we know that they have their consequentialist price. And I agree; however I wonder how many people consciously know what their "price" decision they have made. I once actually conducted this experiment with a group of…

I'd love to see a paper presented on this.

I'd consider writing an informal paper about it - but unfortunately it was a bit hacky and basically just followed our thoughts. So there is no way it would stand up to peer review properly.

I have the notes somewhere so I will try and dig them out and write something up (this was all done from memory plus a short type up I did at the time)

Re: What kind of girl do you think I am?

#72

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Jun 06, 2010, 2:26 PM UTC

btmorex wrote: post #29

sailormoon wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is utter hyperbole. Google never had the "freedom of speech for ~1.3 billion people" to trade. They do not and probably never will have anything like that kind of power. I am far from a Google fanboy but if you're going to criticise them, please keep it reasonable.

That is reasonable. I'm simply asking them to not do business with a repressive government. Maybe, you don't think freedom of speech is important, but I do. As for what kind of effect they could have: Google is an internationally recognized brand that is most certainly known in China (even without being the dominant search engine). Refusing to do business with China would be hard for the state-run media to explain aw…

[deleted]

Re: What kind of girl do you think I am?

#73

Post by araneae » Sun, Jun 06, 2010, 2:40 PM UTC

ErrantX wrote: post #63

Confusion wrote: post #46

The million-dollar question is interesting *because it forces her to really decide* what kind of girl she is. The question actually isn't very interesting at all, because the it suggests there is still a choice to be made. In reality, most people have made that choice long ago and we know that they have their consequentialist price. The price may be a million dollars, saving a hundred people's lives, getting revenge…

Agreed. Actually the question does still hold interest IMO because it forces her to acknowledge to herself that she may have a price. You say: In reality, most people have made that choice long ago and we know that they have their consequentialist price. And I agree; however I wonder how many people consciously know what their "price" decision they have made. I once actually conducted this experiment with a group of…

That actually doesn't surprise me, given the work of Dan Ariely. He's done similar experiments (but not with sex; with people doing some silly task on the computer) and found that people would do better on the task if their reward was a gift, like chocolate, then if there was a comparative dollar amount. The difference disappeared if he referred to it as "$5 worth of chocolate" versus "$5."

We think about getting paid with money differently than we think about getting paid with gifts, for some reason.

Re: What kind of girl do you think I am?

#74

Post by anamax » Sun, Jun 06, 2010, 2:51 PM UTC

liedra wrote: post #52

Confusion wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure the managers at BP that choose to forego certain safety measures completely recognize themselves in this line of reasoning. Which immediately illustrates how dangerously false it is. Companies are amoral (not to be confused with immoral) entities that will not necessarily act in the people's best behavior. If companies act in a morally acceptable way, it is because of the individual employees that together m…

This is one of the reasons why you have to start talking about governance in these situations. Businesses should have governance strategies. They probably mostly do for finance, or safety, or similar, but they should also have governance strategies in place for ethical/social/cultural impact as well. Things like risk assessment or technology assessment can help here, but they're just part of a wider strategy needed t…

> Of course this is quite tricky, but I think in Europe they're starting to move towards the right idea: they have the precautionary principle

The precautionary principle can't be satisfied. Also, its application is extremely political. For example, it should applied to folks who might become parents.

Note that the precautionary principle is typically invoked by folks who don't don't have much skin in the game and don't understand what their costs and benefits are.

Note that regulation is the best example of systemic risk not to mention the inevitable corruption.

This is not to say that "ethics codes" are good and effective.

There is no silver bullet.

Re: What kind of girl do you think I am?

#75

Post by bruceboughton » Sun, Jun 06, 2010, 2:55 PM UTC

nzmsv wrote: post #19

btmorex wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For an individual you can make those proclamations, but individuals don't operate in a vacuum. There is such a thing as morals and utility in a society. There is value in participating in a society. Therefor, there is value is having individual morals and calculating the utility of actions at least on a societal level.

But the morals of a society are not constant. They are a function of the morals of the individuals living in a society. What was perfectly acceptable in the 12th century is barbaric now. In a century or two we will seem barbarians to our descendants. (And they will still be saying that their generation lost all morals and humans will soon die out.)

I wonder for what reasons our society will be judged barbaric by our descendants.

Re: What kind of girl do you think I am?

#76

Post by arthurdent » Sun, Jun 06, 2010, 3:13 PM UTC

ErrantX wrote: post #63

Confusion wrote: post #46

The million-dollar question is interesting *because it forces her to really decide* what kind of girl she is. The question actually isn't very interesting at all, because the it suggests there is still a choice to be made. In reality, most people have made that choice long ago and we know that they have their consequentialist price. The price may be a million dollars, saving a hundred people's lives, getting revenge…

Agreed. Actually the question does still hold interest IMO because it forces her to acknowledge to herself that she may have a price. You say: In reality, most people have made that choice long ago and we know that they have their consequentialist price. And I agree; however I wonder how many people consciously know what their "price" decision they have made. I once actually conducted this experiment with a group of…

I find this fascinating -- your reply and the parent to your reply (@Confusion) actually gave a lot of clarity to what I think on the matter.

I'm 5 years out of college and I think my position has changed significantly since then. Until probably a year out of college I only thought very abstractly about questions like this and believed there was a large class of problems for which there is no price.

Until a year or so after I graduated, I think I believed that most people (hookers excluded) wouldn't offer sex at any cash price. I always thought those transactions generally HAD to occur masked as "I'll buy you some beers/some dinners/we'll date/any time or cash value exchange in return for sex"

My more recent experience with regards to your experiment is almost the exact opposite of your findings. I'm consistently shocked by how LOW a price people are willing accept for all manner of tasks, including sex.

Not to sound way too shady, but I've since found that the cash price point for sex for most women is not only "no price", but in fact far lower than I would have imagined. Or maybe I've just met way sluttier girls since graduating. The price for most men is basically zero.

I'll also say there's likely some sort of phase transition here where the answer to "what kind of girl she is" is dependent on some socioeconomic indicator. Hypothesis: Money and status buy people a LOT of self importance and stricter adherence to a moral code. People don't have to bend their espoused morals unless faced with tough questions.

Re your experiment: - saying and doing are different, especially since the question seems to have been explicitly phrased as an exchange of sex for money. there are all sorts of ways to phrase the question where sex is understood but without actually saying it. - £1MM is doesn't even feel like a real number to most students. hypothetical questions get hypothetical answers.

Like @Confusion, I now generally believe there's a price for everything. If it can be measured in dollars, thats an easy question to answer. The hard questions are those that are measured in things money can't buy.

Re: What kind of girl do you think I am?

#77

Post by ericb » Sun, Jun 06, 2010, 3:19 PM UTC

jimbokun wrote: post #62

Confusion wrote: post #46

The million-dollar question is interesting *because it forces her to really decide* what kind of girl she is. The question actually isn't very interesting at all, because the it suggests there is still a choice to be made. In reality, most people have made that choice long ago and we know that they have their consequentialist price. The price may be a million dollars, saving a hundred people's lives, getting revenge…

"Going into a business negotiation thinking either you or them are deontologists is selfdeception that will hinder you in your negotiations." Maybe. But in practice, it might be a simplifying assumption that either you or them are "deontologists" in the context of the negotiations because there is nothing you have to offer that has any chance of budging their position. In other words, she may be that kind of girl for…

True. Also, I've seen a number of negotiations broken off over pride--offers were made that were deemed "offensive." Don't be misled by treating everyone as "consequentialists" or you are very likely to step on a pride booby trap and cause the other party to sever negotiations. So in a practical sense, your simplifying assumption makes a lot of sense.

Re: What kind of girl do you think I am?

#78

Post by yosho » Sun, Jun 06, 2010, 4:24 PM UTC

ErrantX wrote: post #63

Confusion wrote: post #46

The million-dollar question is interesting *because it forces her to really decide* what kind of girl she is. The question actually isn't very interesting at all, because the it suggests there is still a choice to be made. In reality, most people have made that choice long ago and we know that they have their consequentialist price. The price may be a million dollars, saving a hundred people's lives, getting revenge…

Agreed. Actually the question does still hold interest IMO because it forces her to acknowledge to herself that she may have a price. You say: In reality, most people have made that choice long ago and we know that they have their consequentialist price. And I agree; however I wonder how many people consciously know what their "price" decision they have made. I once actually conducted this experiment with a group of…

honestly, I think most girls would sleep with someone for way less than 1 million. i think one very important missing ingredient is a clause stating that her decision will remain anonymous and no one will ever find out about the transaction, ever.

Re: What kind of girl do you think I am?

#79

Post by billswift » Sun, Jun 06, 2010, 4:42 PM UTC

anamax wrote: post #74

liedra wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of the reasons why you have to start talking about governance in these situations. Businesses should have governance strategies. They probably mostly do for finance, or safety, or similar, but they should also have governance strategies in place for ethical/social/cultural impact as well. Things like risk assessment or technology assessment can help here, but they're just part of a wider strategy needed t…

> Of course this is quite tricky, but I think in Europe they're starting to move towards the right idea: they have the precautionary principle The precautionary principle can't be satisfied. Also, its application is extremely political. For example, it should applied to folks who might become parents. Note that the precautionary principle is typically invoked by folks who don't don't have much skin in the game and do…

On the other hand there is a quote: "Once you have to write your code of ethics down, you have already lost." Unfortunately, I not only don't remember the source, I can't even remember the context.

Re: What kind of girl do you think I am?

#80

Post by billswift » Sun, Jun 06, 2010, 4:54 PM UTC

derefr wrote: post #17

btmorex wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For an individual you can make those proclamations, but individuals don't operate in a vacuum. There is such a thing as morals and utility in a society. There is value in participating in a society. Therefor, there is value is having individual morals and calculating the utility of actions at least on a societal level.

Right—that's, effectively, the difference between "cultural meta-ethics" and "moral relativism." What I'm saying is that, on an individual level, ethics is a problem that will be completely solved by neuropsychology: once we find out our particular utility function, we just have obey it optimally. Thus, Ethics as a field of endeavor should drop that kind of individual-level moral quandary, and focus on inter-societal…

From the most recent post on LW http://lesswrong.com/lw/2aa/virtue_ethics_for_consequentiali...

Humans are not inherently expected utility maximizers, they're bounded agents with little capacity for reflection. Utility functions are great and all, but in the words of Zack M. Davis, "Humans don't have utility functions."