Ok, that’s what might happen if the agent had the power to ask unlimited hypothetical questions in arbitrarily many counterfactual scenarios. But that is not the case in the real world: the agent would be able to ask one, or maybe two questions at most, before the human attitude to the violin would change, and further data would become tainted.
Is it really the further data that becomes tainted, rather than the original data? Usually when you think longer about a subject, we’d think your opinions would become more rather than less valid.
Is it really the further data that becomes tainted, rather than the original data? Usually when you think longer about a subject, we’d think your opinions would become more rather than less valid.