Newcomb's paradox

Dmytry · 2009-04-27T04:12:02

I came across this cool thing: Newcomb's paradox Quote: person is playing a game operated by the Predictor, an entity somehow presented as being exceptionally skilled at predicting people's actions. The exact nature of the Predictor varies between retellings of the paradox. Some assume that the character always has a reputation for being completely infallible and incapable of error. The Predictor can be presented as a psychic, as a superintelligent alien, as a deity, etc. However, the original discussion by Nozick says only that the Predictor's predictions are "almost certainly" correct, and also specifies that "what you actually decide to do is not part of the explanation of why he made the prediction he made". With this original version of the problem, some of the discussion below is inapplicable. The player of the game is presented with two opaque boxes, labeled A and B. The player is permitted to take the contents of both boxes, or just of box B. (The option of taking only box A is ignored, for reasons soon to be obvious.) Box A contains $1,000. The contents of box B, however, are determined as follows: At some point before the start of the game, the Predictor makes a prediction as to whether the player of the game will take just box B, or both boxes. If the Predictor predicts that both boxes will be taken, then box B will contain nothing. If the Predictor predicts that only box B will be taken, then box B will contain $1,000,000. By the time the game begins, and the player is called upon to choose which boxes to take, the prediction has already been made, and the contents of box B have already been determined. That is, box B contains either $0 or $1,000,000 before the game begins, and once the game begins even the Predictor is powerless to change the contents of the boxes. Before the game begins, the player is aware of all the rules of the game, including the two possible contents of box B, the fact that its contents are based on the Predictor's prediction, and knowledge of the Predictor's infallibility. The only information withheld from the player is what prediction the Predictor made, and thus what the contents of box B are. So, would you choose one box or both boxes? Note that BTW when you're presented with the choice, boxes are already containing or not containing the money, so at that moment you lose nothing from choosing both... but if you do choose both, and if it has been predicted, you get just the 1000 rather than 1000 000 or 1001000.

LessBread

1,415

April 14, 2009 09:10 PM

These wouldn't happen to be Schrödinger boxes would they? [grin]

"I thought what I'd do was, I'd pretend I was one of those deaf-mutes." - the Laughing Man

zedz

291

April 14, 2009 11:34 PM

why are so many ppl taking both boxes?
True I may of read wrong, but only B seems the better bet

eidt - misread, Dmytry's last line
edit - actually I was right first time, only B is the better choice, (wasnt there a study about trusting gut instinct)

pinacolada

834

April 14, 2009 11:43 PM

Quote: Original post by zedz
why are so many ppl taking both boxes?
True I may of read wrong, but only B seems the better bet

Here is a thought that should reinforce the inherent paradox. Imagine that you're a spectator at this game. You get to see exactly what is inside both boxes (but of course, you can't give a hint to the person playing). You see that there is $1,000 just sitting there in box A, and the person is free to take it. But the person refuses to take the $1,000, even though there is nothing stopping him. He takes the other box (whatever that is), but he leaves $1,000 just sitting there. That's crazy, isn't it?

zedz

291

April 14, 2009 11:52 PM

Quote: As I consider myself a somewhat rational person, I would not base my decision on the assumption that a Predictor existed and could predict my choice.

that may not be as rational as u think, there are a few studies where ppl have been able to predict how ppl are gonna choose at greater than 50% accuracy (It wouldnt surprise me if brilliant poker players have this 'luck' skill)

(*)ok not luck but a dudusive (holmes) quantity

Quote: Then, imagine being a spectator and watching some guy refuse to take an extra $1000, when it's clearly just sitting there waiting to be taken. That's seems crazy, doesn't it?

I throw back at you, the thought of watching some dude miss out on all that cash (probably) by picking both boxes

pinacolada

834

April 15, 2009 12:00 AM

Quote:
Quote: Original post by zedz
Then, imagine being a spectator and watching some guy refuse to take an extra $1000, when it's clearly just sitting there waiting to be taken. That's seems crazy, doesn't it?

I throw back at you, the thought of watching some dude miss out on all that cash (probably) by picking both boxes

But.. the decision was already made. You can see exactly what is in the boxes. The only thing left to decide is whether or not the person will take what's there.

owl

376

April 15, 2009 12:16 AM

I'd kill them all take what's in both boxes and also the rest of the money they were planning to use for the next tryial.

[size="2"]I like the Walrus best.

Dmytry

Author

1,151

April 15, 2009 12:55 AM

owl: see 'minority report' for what's gonna happen to you, given that predictor is involved...

zedz

291

April 15, 2009 03:30 AM

Quote: You can see exactly what is in the boxes

first rule of magic (actually I dont know what that is but anyways, Ill bullshit)
whatever u do, dont trust your eyes (mow watching a magic trick which you + I have done no doubt many times, first rule is like I say dont trust your 'deceived' eyes), deception/sleight of hand is everything, the audiences sees what its been led to be shown(?).

actually this trick is applicable in games as well.

I dont really see the paradox here, unlike the class case of 'the other side of the page is a lir'

Krokhin

218

April 15, 2009 05:35 AM

Quote: Original post by Dmytry
I came across this cool thing:
Newcomb's paradox

I just recalling another cool thing,do you remember

"> "Brother" movie,the part where Kitano play in game with guy (0:20)?
Suppose that Kitano know that guy can forecast the future,don't tell him about a secret with plastic glass,and what will happen?Your super-guy will remain a loser forever[smile]

Zipster

2,420

April 15, 2009 06:17 AM

I'm with Lode on this one. You either have a very high chance of getting $1 million and a slim chance of getting $0 by taking only box B, or a slim chance of getting $1.0001 million and a very high chance of getting $1000 by taking both boxes. If your goal was to walk away with something, then you'd take both boxes. But if you were playing the odds, you'd always take just box B.

Now, if box A had $10 million and box B had $1 billion, that would be a different story since I'd be very happy with a guaranteed $10 million with a slight chance of an extra $1 billion by taking both boxes; even though there was a good chance I'd get $1 billion by taking box B, I wouldn't be able to risk getting nothing, or in other words, losing a guaranteed $10 million. Guess I'm not much of gambler [smile]

Newcomb's paradox

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

Newcomb's paradox

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

Reticulating splines