You have a very high IQ like him so the two of you working together might be able to solve the problem
You could also get your girlfriend Marilyn Vos Savant with her IQ of 228 to help you so why not ask her ?
I don’t have a girlfriend and she banned me from her forum and deleted all my posts and so I think she has psychotic issues. Because my posts were trying to be normal.
Euler080
I feel the need to answer your response to my response in more than one part, so here goes.
For an optimal decision of human: which in English, would be taken to mean the best or most favorable decision of human - we have to first ask what context we are using the word human in here; given the parameters(“Longevity, death, etc.”), I can only assume you are referring to humanity, that is, mankind as a whole. Further leading us to consider what the optimal outcome should/would be for humanity. Once we understand the outcome(the result of the decision) then we understand how optimal the decision is, but . . .
. . . there are a lot of people that can not agree on the simplest things . . .
. . . at the moment, as is evident on this site - many people would like to have their own definitions of concepts that have had definitions laid out long ago.
Because the value of data changes over time, for example: the value of historical data decays over time. We can only guess at the future with current models - this only serves the purpose of creating loopholes that can be exploited by the unscrupulous among us. Take away the unscrupulous and part of the data problem goes away. Basically you need to be able to snapshot the complete set of data at any given time and compare it to a snapshot from a different time to determine an outcome and compensate for the decay. This compensation is binomial in nature - that is - it adds to success or failure; the compensation can enhance the outcome or diminish the outcome.
The following may not seem intuitive and/or logical: there has to be rules and limits to what each of us can do but as you know man’s ability to stick with a set of rules and know his limits is flawed. This is likely due to the fact that, as history has shown us, rules and limits also change over time. Understanding change and what causes it is important - understand change, then you can keep fine tuning the decision. Understand change, and you can begin understanding rules and limits.
Certainly it can . . . but whether this would happen or not is dependent on many factors including humans themselves. We would have to rely on mankind to develop the ability to make better decisions based on more data - sometimes less is more. Currently it seems as though many people prefer exploiting loopholes which hinders sound decision making.
I could have included a lot more in this answer but I instead chose to limit my response - it should be noted that because of this, we are not fully exploring the available data.
