I need to ask: Is this post wrong? Not, is this post stupid or boring or whatever. Is it wrong?

As best as I can tell, there are a handful of objections to the post itself, but there seems to be mostly agreement in its conclusion.

The two main detractors are such:

• Morendil, who seems to be saying that the question, "What do you do?" will "reliably induce answers which are answers to something different from the scenario as posed." Namely, the answer given to that question will be the same as if I had asked "What do you want to answer?"
• Peter_de_Blanc, who claims that the scenario is inconsistent

There is also a general complaint that Omega is not being defined correctly, so I will leave Omega out of it.

So, without regard to how boring or uninteresting this is, is the following correct?

Given a perfect predictor (PP) who possesses the ability to accurately predict the outcome of any scenario:

If A = You pay PP $5 and
S = PP asks for $5
p(A|S) = p(S|A) * p(A) / (p(S|A) * p(A) + p(S|~A) * p(~A))

In addition, I add the restraint that the perfect predictor will never ask you for $5 if it doesn't predict you will give it $5 when asked. This sets p(PP asks|You don't pay) to 0, so p(S|~A) = 0.

p(A|S) = p(S|A) * p(A) / (p(S|A) * p(A) + 0 * p(~A))
p(A|S) = p(S|A) * p(A) / p(S|A) * p(A)
p(A|S) = 1

Therefore, p(You pay PP $5|PP asks for $5) is 1. The probability that you pay PP $5 given that PP just asked you for $5 is 1.

The phrasing in this comment is different than the phrasing in the original post. This is an even more simplified version of the question. Am I right?