True. And I did not say over-optimising overall. Humans are very prone to over-optimization (i.e. money at the expense of happiness and/or a life). How would you have phrased that?
In your example, money versus happiness is a choice between alternatives. Whatever goal you are trying to optimize towards should provide the guidance in making the choices between alternatives.
Language about “Over-optimizing” one alternative at the expense of another distracts from identifying your real goals and how you make the tradeoffs to achieve them
“at the expense of overall utility” is unnecessary for the “short-sighted” bit: that is implied by the phrase. Short-sighted-ness is a well known character flaw.
And your version is still bad. Over-optimising at the expense of overall utility is hard to parse. You’re missing “one aspect”. You shouldn’t over-optimise one aspect at the expense of overall utility.
True. And I did not say over-optimising overall. Humans are very prone to over-optimization (i.e. money at the expense of happiness and/or a life). How would you have phrased that?
Humans usually phrase it as “You should keep your priorities straight”.
Thank you but I don’t feel that that clearly expresses my point.
In your example, money versus happiness is a choice between alternatives. Whatever goal you are trying to optimize towards should provide the guidance in making the choices between alternatives.
Language about “Over-optimizing” one alternative at the expense of another distracts from identifying your real goals and how you make the tradeoffs to achieve them
“Do not over-optimise one aspect at the expense of overall utility”
Good phrasing.
but which is better . . . .
You should not over-optimize or be short-sighted at the expense of overall utility.
OR
You should not be short-sighted or over-optimize at the expense of overall utility.
“at the expense of overall utility” applies to both halves of the statement
Is it still just as bad? Or was the initial comment a bit hasty and unwarranted in that respect?
“at the expense of overall utility” is unnecessary for the “short-sighted” bit: that is implied by the phrase. Short-sighted-ness is a well known character flaw.
And your version is still bad. Over-optimising at the expense of overall utility is hard to parse. You’re missing “one aspect”. You shouldn’t over-optimise one aspect at the expense of overall utility.