= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Emile comments on Omega's subcontracting to Alpha - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (90)
Isn't this just a reformulation of Newcomb's problem ?
Mechanically, "Omega + alpha + the random generator" is equivalent to Newcomb's Omega.
[Edit: OK, it isn't :)]
The difference is that Alpha is generating the contents of the envelope independently on your decision, while in Newcomb's problem Omega is placing money in the box under the direct (acausal) control of your decision.
I guess you're right - especially considering the level of disagreement in the other comments.
The fact that I can't exactly pin down at what point I disagree with those who say they take the £10 indicates that I don't understand the problem enough (I may not understand enough about Newcomb's problem either).