Ah, good point. So “picking the best strategy, not just the best individual moves” is similar to self-modifying to be a maximizer in this case.
On the other hand, if our satisficer runs on updateless decision theory, picking the best strategy is already what it does all the time. So I guess it depends on how your satisficer is programmed.
On the other hand, if our satisficer runs on updateless decision theory...
This seems to imply that an updatless satisficer would behave like a maximiser—or that an updatless satisficer with bounded rationality would make themselves into a maximiser as a precaution.
A UDT satisficer is closer to the original than a pure maximizer, because where different strategies fall above the threshold the original tie-breaking rule can still be applied.
Ah, good point. So “picking the best strategy, not just the best individual moves” is similar to self-modifying to be a maximizer in this case.
On the other hand, if our satisficer runs on updateless decision theory, picking the best strategy is already what it does all the time. So I guess it depends on how your satisficer is programmed.
This seems to imply that an updatless satisficer would behave like a maximiser—or that an updatless satisficer with bounded rationality would make themselves into a maximiser as a precaution.
A UDT satisficer is closer to the original than a pure maximizer, because where different strategies fall above the threshold the original tie-breaking rule can still be applied.