That is, find a distribution over policies + weighting of utility functions such that (a) the distribution is optimal according to the weighting, (b) each utility function is weighted so that the difference between their preferred policy and the actual policy is 1. I think this exists by a simple fixed point argument. I’m not sure if it’s unique.
I don’t understand (a), but (b) has problems when there are policies that are actually ideal for all/most utilities—you don’t want to rule out generally optimal policies if they exist.
That’s pretty much the “Mutual worth bargaining solution”
I don’t see how it can be the same as the mutual worth bargaining solution. That bargaining solution assumes we were given a default solution, and this proposal doesn’t (but see above, this solution doesn’t make sense).
That’s pretty much the “Mutual worth bargaining solution” https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/7kvBxG9ZmYb5rDRiq/gains-from-trade-slug-versus-galaxy-how-much-would-i-give-up
I don’t understand (a), but (b) has problems when there are policies that are actually ideal for all/most utilities—you don’t want to rule out generally optimal policies if they exist.
I don’t see how it can be the same as the mutual worth bargaining solution. That bargaining solution assumes we were given a default solution, and this proposal doesn’t (but see above, this solution doesn’t make sense).
I misunderstood your proposal.