wedrifid comments on Newcomb's Problem: A problem for Causal Decision Theories - Less Wrong

8 [deleted] 16 August 2010 11:25AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (120)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: wedrifid 16 August 2010 08:43:20PM 0 points [-]

I will admit, given the prevalence of CDT users to fail in this scenario, my objection isn't that strong, CDT tends to lead people to the wrong answer in this scenario, so it's not useful to them.

I suggest that the way you use 'CDT' is actually a hop and a jump in the direction of TDT. When you already have a box containing $1,000,000 in your hand you are looking at a $10,000 sitting on the table and deciding not to take it. Even though you know that nothing you do now has any way of causing the money you already have to disappear. Pure CDT agents just don't do that.

Comment author: Kingreaper 16 August 2010 08:54:09PM *  1 point [-]

If you don't know whether you're a simulation or not, you don't know whether or not your taking the second box will cause the real-world money not to be there. And, as a simulation, you probably won't get to spend any of that sim-world money you've got there.

To be fair, I don't particularly use CDT consciously, because it seems to be flawed somehow (or at least, harder to use than intuition, and I'm lazy). But I came across newcomb's paradox, thought about it, and realised that in the traditional formulation I'm probably a simulation.

I don't see why realising I'm probably a simulation is something a CDT agent can't do?

Comment author: wedrifid 17 August 2010 04:30:00AM 0 points [-]

If you don't know whether you're a simulation or not, you don't know whether or not your taking the second box will cause the real-world money not to be there. And, as a simulation, you probably won't get to spend any of that sim-world money you've got there.

Replace 'Omega' with Patrick Jane. No sims. What do you do?

Comment author: Kingreaper 17 August 2010 10:36:24PM *  1 point [-]

A) I one-box. I will one-box in most reasonable scenarios.

B)How do you predict other people's actions?

Personally, I mentally simulate them. Not particularly well, mind, but I do mentally simulate them. Am I unusual in this?

I've never watched the Mentalist, but if Patrick Jane is sufficiently good to get a 99% success rate, I'm guessing his simulations are pretty damn good.

Comment author: arundelo 17 August 2010 10:51:46PM 1 point [-]

Patrick Jane is a fictional character in the TV show The Mentalist. He's a former (fake) psychic who now uses his cold reading skills to fight crime.

Comment author: Kingreaper 17 August 2010 11:38:23PM 1 point [-]

Cheers, had been looking that up, oddly my edit to my post didn't seem to update it.