Newcomb's Problem

[Souron]

Well, it doesn't say in the OP the alien actually asks you which box you will open, if it would then Derren Brown could be the alien.

OP says: Omega selects a human being, sets down two boxes in front of them, and flies away

It doesn't say that the alien doesn't ask either.

Nothing is said about the mechanism the alien uses to predict, in the OP or any other version of Newcomb's paradox. So we can imagine any (possible) mechanism is used to do so. Including polling, or reading body language. So yes, Derren Brown could be the alien.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

It doesn't say that the alien doesn't ask either.

Well, yeah, that is true.

Nothing is said about the mechanism the alien uses to predict, in the OP or any other version of Newcomb's paradox. So we can imagine any (possible) mechanism is used to do so. Including polling, or reading body language. So yes, Derren Brown could be the alien.

Since it's a highly advanced alien, my guess is he has placed an invisible spycam and will transport the 1.000.000 out of box B, using the teleporter function of the box, into his spaceship the moment someone opens A, or tries to open both at the same time

 

[Souron]

Well, yeah, that is true.
Since it's a highly advanced alien, my guess is he has placed an invisible spycam and will transport the 1.000.000 out of box B, using the teleporter function of the box, into his spaceship the moment someone opens A, or tries to open both at the same time

No, that would violate the premise. The alien leaves. This is known. This is a hypothetical in that sense: you somehow know that the alien has truly left. The mechanism for making box A disappear is automatic.

A common variation of the paradox is instead of listing the alien's track record, to add as an additional premise the effectiveness of the oracle's predictive abilities. This does not change the vote for most people.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I wasn't actually suggesting a spycam-teleporter-spaceship set-up :/

The 100 observations did remind me of some roulette table somewhere (forgot, was a long time ago) which spun 142 times black in a row. The place was in chaos with the whole casino trying to bet as much as they could on red about 20 or 30 spins in.

 

[Defiant47]

The beautiful thing about this problem is this:

If you accept the logical conclusion that picking both boxes is more advantageous than picking Box B, then you will end up with less money than if you came to the opposite conclusion.

 

[Samson]

Not so. The problem assumes the direction of causality. It explicitly states that the entity moves on and does not take money from under box B if you pick both boxes.

Perhaps I used the wrong word. I meant that if you assume that causality only works forward in time, then you may go for both boxes. If you assume that it is at least possible for a decision made now to effect the outcome of events in the past then you would be sensible to go for 1 box.

 

[warpus]

I get all the calculations behind it, but all those calculations mean that, as I said from the start, you are betting the alien will have predicted wrongly for the first time in 101 tries.

So you should keepwith tradition and make your choice so that the alien's predictions come true once again?

Once you have the boxes in front of you it doesn't matter what the alien predicted - unless there is cheating going on, after the fact, in which case you should go with whatever the alien 'predicted'.

 

[warpus]

Perhaps I used the wrong word. I meant that if you assume that causality only works forward in time, then you may go for both boxes. If you assume that it is at least possible for a decision made now to effect the outcome of events in the past then you would be sensible to go for 1 box.

I agree with this, but thought that there was a "the alien isn't cheating, causality is in effect, etc." clause that would prevent this sort of thing from ahppening.

 

[Souron]

Perhaps I used the wrong word. I meant that if you assume that causality only works forward in time, then you may go for both boxes. If you assume that it is at least possible for a decision made now to effect the outcome of events in the past then you would be sensible to go for 1 box.

No, this is not why people vote for box B. It is part of the premise that choosing only box B does not change what is in box B.

But causation is not the same as implication. It is still true that if you pick only box B, then you are likely to come out ahead.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

So you should keep with tradition and make your choice so that the alien's predictions come true once again?

There seems to be a real disconnection here The alien also predicted correctly when people opened both boxes. This is in the OP. Both choices where made during the 100 observations, in every occasion the alien also predicted correctly when both boxes where opened. So, I am not choosing B to make the alien's prediction come true. I am saying that whatever this Alien is using to predict the outcome, be it trickery, genuine prediction or even plain luck, I'm not staking 1.000.000 on the chance that I'm the first person out of a 101 where his prediction/trick/luck doesn't work. 1.000.000 in the pocket, instead of risking 1.000.000 to gain 1.000 on the off chance I'm the first out of 101.

I am not saying what you should do. I am saying that should you chose to open both boxes, you are betting against a 100 out of a 100 streak.

Once you have the boxes in front of you it doesn't matter what the alien predicted - unless there is cheating going on, after the fact, in which case you should go with whatever the alien 'predicted'.

I'm not sure I am told what the alien predicted. In the OP is stated he just drops the box and leaves. Could be he's doing a whole interview or show and dance routine which finishes with tonight's prediction in neon, but since that's not really part of the problem at hand, I am merely basing my choice on what information I've been given.

 

[warpus]

There seems to be a real disconnection here The alien also predicted correctly when people opened both boxes. This is in the OP. Both choices where made during the 100 observations, in every occasion the alien also predicted correctly when both boxes where opened. So, I am not choosing B to make the alien's prediction come true. I am saying that whatever this Alien is using to predict the outcome, be it trickery, genuine prediction or even plain luck, I'm not staking 1.000.000 on the chance that I'm the first person out of a 101 where his prediction/trick/luck doesn't work. 1.000.000 in the pocket, instead of risking 1.000.000 to gain 1.000 on the off chance I'm the first out of 101.

It's a bit of a faulty scenario, since the only way the alien could have done any of this is if it cheated in some way, be it by messing around with causality, time travel, teleportation, or whatever.

If something like this happened, I would follow the pattern, because to me it would appear as though the alien was cheating, so it wouldn't really make sense to try to 'prove him wrong'.

 

[Defiant47]

It's useless to argue anyways... Perfection won the thread a while back

 

[Kennigit]

The beautiful thing about this problem is this:

If you accept the logical conclusion that picking both boxes is more advantageous than picking Box B, then you will end up with less money than if you came to the opposite conclusion.

Yeah, but I still maxed out my possible earnings. I would have a choice between 0 and 1000. And I'd get the 1000. Good job to the alien predicting me correctly. Way back when I said I bet cfc could get a high prediction success rate with people they knew.

Didn't read new posts in the thread.

 

[Souron]

It's a bit of a faulty scenario, since the only way the alien could have done any of this is if it cheated in some way, be it by messing around with causality, time travel, teleportation, or whatever.

If something like this happened, I would follow the pattern, because to me it would appear as though the alien was cheating, so it wouldn't really make sense to try to 'prove him wrong'.

How do you get that the alien must have cheated? He could just be lucky. Or he could have done anonymous polling. Or maybe he cloned you and asked your twin what he would do. There are many ways to predict the future, without time travel.

 

[warpus]

How do you get that the alien must have cheated? He could just be lucky. Or he could have done anonymous polling. Or maybe he cloned you and asked your twin what he would do. There are many ways to predict the future, without time travel.

Because basically what this boils down to is this:

"If you take both boxes, box B will be empty. If you take only box B, it will contain a million dollars"

implying that you didn't have a choice in what you were going to pick, or that if you did have a choice - the contents of the box changed after you have made your selection (and it wasn't the one that the alien predicted)

The whole exercise is really just commentary on free will, the illusion thereof, etc.

 

[Souron]

It's not commentary on free will if you don't assume that the oracle is 100% accurate.

 

[Perfection]

It's not commentary on free will if you don't assume that the oracle is 100% accurate.

Not even if it is. Will being predictable doesn't necessarily make it unfree.

 

[warpus]

It's not commentary on free will if you don't assume that the oracle is 100% accurate.

Yeah, but if you try to use logic to reason your way through the "riddle", people just say: "But no! the alien was so far 100% correct with its predictions!"

The assumption seems to be that the alien is able to predict what you're going to do fairly accurately..

 

[Mise]

For all the two-boxers, who have eloquently stated why they are two-boxers, and have made an absolute determination that they, if presented with such a choice, would unwaveringly and unrepentantly choose two boxes, with absolute certainty, consider this: Erik is Omega and he made this thread in order to help him predict your choice.

Ultimately, if you're the type of guy who would choose two boxes, Omega will know this, and will assign the money accordingly. Of course, that means that both sides are right, just that we one-boxers are also $1,000,000 better off for it

 

[Brighteye]

I'd go for one box, because if Omega has predicted wrongly for the first time and given me nothing I can sell my story to the papers for even more money.
So I get a million either way.