Case File
efta-efta00847823DOJ Data Set 9OtherFrom: Joscha Bach
Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
efta-efta00847823
Pages
2
Persons
0
Integrity
Extracted Text (OCR)
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
From: Joscha Bach
To: Jeffrey Epstein <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Decision making
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 20:26:59 +0000
1. Does luck mean gambling, or getting the probabilities right by intuition?
2. What else tells you anything about the future? (The past also tells us how much is does not tell us about the
future)
Am 26.08.2015 um 16:23 schrieb jeffrey E. <[email protected]>:
luck plays a role. 2, looking back ( bayesian ) might not tell you anthing about the future.
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Joscha Bach <
wrote:
Re motivation: Have you seen the recent movie "Ex Machina"? I liked it; one of the few Al movies that have
not been dumbed down. The main character is a beautiful female looking Al, clearly intelligent, and able to
manipulate humans to an arbitrary degree. What makes her inhuman is that she is probably motivated by a
single principle, like option maximization. That would make her an inscrutable psychopath. Option
maximization would entail energy, physical integrity, perhaps reproduction, certainly learning, but you will
have an agent that you won't like to share a prisoner's dilemma with.
How do you approach decision making? I have recently learned that people that subscribe for Cryonics
(freezing one's head or body in the hope to be revived when future technologies make it possible) assign a
lower probability to that it works than the general population. But whereas "normal" people tend to make
binary models about the world: something is "probably not going to work, so let us not bother", many of the
Cryonics folks will argue that paying $500 a month for a 1% chance of immortality seems like a bargain.
This seems to generalize: in principle, we should perform a Bayesian approximation for all our major
decisions, attach probability distributions to everything in the space of possible beliefs, and be able to
outperform the vast majority of folks that relies on narratives (i.e. binary yes/no decisions about the facts in
the world). Gigerenzer, Kahnemann and many others have shown that human brains are terrible of getting
this intuitively right, to the point where an absence of fine-grained domain knowledge often leads to better
management decisions etc.
The divide between probabilistic models vs. narrative models is reflected to some degree in the conflict
between probabilistic and logic based Al. In practice, we will probably need to combine both, but I wonder if
there is an intrinsic limit to probabilistic descriptions in a highly complex world, where we cannot observe
baseline probabilities anyway.
How do you decide? Do you Solomonoff-induce and Bayes the hell out of the stock market, do you reason,
do you soak up data and let your intuitions guide you, or is most of the important stuff depending on
communication and negotiation? Is there are general approach, or how much should theories of decision
making be dependent on the domain?
Cheers,
Joscha
EFTA00847823
please note
The information contained in this communication is
confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may
constitute inside information, and is intended only for
the use of the addressee. It is the property of
JEE
Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by
return e-mail or by e-mail to [email protected], and
destroy this communication and all copies thereof,
including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved
EFTA00847824
Technical Artifacts (2)
View in Artifacts BrowserEmail addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.
Email
[email protected]Wire Ref
reflectedRelated Documents (6)
House OversightEmailNov 11, 2025
Email from Joscha Bach to Jeffrey Epstein discussing speculative neuroscience and social theories
The passage contains a lengthy, speculative discussion of brain development, race, gender, and political ideas. It mentions Jeffrey Epstein as a recipient but provides no concrete allegations, financi Email sent from Joscha Bach to Jeffrey Epstein on 7/23/2016. Discusses hypothetical neural layer timing and its alleged impact on racial cognitive differences. Contains controversial statements about
8p
DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceUnknown
EFTA Document EFTA01361937
0p
DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceUnknown
EFTA Document EFTA01790356
0p
DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceUnknown
EFTA Document EFTA01789778
0p
DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceUnknown
EFTA Document EFTA01903362
0p
DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceUnknown
EFTA Document EFTA01903808
0p
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.