That doesn’t actually solve the problem. The system could just encode the desired information in the semantics of some unrelated sentences—e.g. talk about pasta to indicate X = 0, or talk about rain to indicate X = 1.
I expected you to bring up the Natural Abstraction Hypothesis here. Wouldn’t the communication between the parties naturally use the same concepts?
Same concepts yes, but that does not necessarily imply that they’re encoded in the same way as humans typically use language.
Current theme: default
Less Wrong (text)
Less Wrong (link)
Arrow keys: Next/previous image
Escape or click: Hide zoomed image
Space bar: Reset image size & position
Scroll to zoom in/out
(When zoomed in, drag to pan; double-click to close)
Keys shown in yellow (e.g., ]) are accesskeys, and require a browser-specific modifier key (or keys).
]
Keys shown in grey (e.g., ?) do not require any modifier keys.
?
Esc
h
f
a
m
v
c
r
q
t
u
o
,
.
/
s
n
e
;
Enter
[
\
k
i
l
=
-
0
′
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
→
↓
←
↑
Space
x
z
`
g
That doesn’t actually solve the problem. The system could just encode the desired information in the semantics of some unrelated sentences—e.g. talk about pasta to indicate X = 0, or talk about rain to indicate X = 1.
I expected you to bring up the Natural Abstraction Hypothesis here. Wouldn’t the communication between the parties naturally use the same concepts?
Same concepts yes, but that does not necessarily imply that they’re encoded in the same way as humans typically use language.