|
| Thread: Newcomb's Problem |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted June 22, 2013 10:46 PM |
|
|
Lexxan:
If Omega thinks you're going to pick both boxes, you only get $1000. If it thinks you're only going to pick Box B, you'll get a million. Isn't picking Box B the optimal strategy, then? If your goal is to maximize payoff, then taking both boxes "because you'll get money anyway" doesn't work. Omega has done this thousands of times before (or millions of times, if you prefer) and has never been wrong, so you have a very good reason to believe that Omega will predict your choice correctly.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Lexxan
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Unimpressed by your logic
|
|
posted June 22, 2013 11:51 PM |
|
Edited by Lexxan at 23:53, 22 Jun 2013.
|
not really. Regardless of what happens, there will ALWAYS be money in box A and there MAY be money in box B. if I want to maximize profit, i'll take the box that guarantees me money.
Of course, if i take box A, i might just as well take box B, regardless of whether it has money or not. It's a moot point.
From my logic, I would always take both boxes and if Omega is always correct in judging me, it cannot be fooled. Therefore, MY pay-out would always be $1000
Bear in mind that this is MY personal logic, based on what i would instinctively do in such a situation.
Logically I would say that if Omega knows your goal is maximizing profit, it will be aware that you'll pick box B. It will know if you're greedy, a gambler, someone who will play it safe or someone who is indecisive. This is basically what the problem is. it's more a personality test than it is a logic test, IMO. But I digress.
If you play if safe, you'll do like me and take box A ANYWAY, Omega will know this and will correctly predict you'll take both boxes.
If you are indecisive, omega will put nothing in the box, because, as it stated, assuming randomness will net you nothing more than a grand, tops, and only if you take both boxes (because box A yields a grand by default)
I assume it's interesting when you look at it from a gambler's perspective. I would assume here that the key to the problem is that Omega is NEVER wrong in its predictions. Therefore, it will always be correct UNLESS you defy logic.
If you want to take box B and ONLY box b, Omega will knows this (as it has never been wrong before and put in the mill. You will ONLY success in getting the maximum amount of profit if you change your mind on the spot. Whether Omega knows this possible doubt and has factored it in its decision seems like a moot point to me. You *can't* know, nor discern it from logic. Let's just assume that Omega bases decision on your current incentives.
The way Omega phrases it, if you pick box B and only B, you'll get with the million. It notably, does NOT mention that you can pick box B, then pick box A in addition to it, and walk away with an additional thousand bucks. It's merely an assumption, but i would say Omega phrases it that way because it doesn't WANT you to make that decision, instead focusing on your greed and implying your only choice is between a thousant and a million.
MOST people i guess would pick the million, just because they would be tricked by Omega. Omega knows this and will, in MOST cases put the million on box B. By this strain of logic, ONLY if you change your mind ON THE SPOT, AFTER OMEGA HAS MADE THEIR DECISION about whether taking both boxes or not, you can end up with either nothing or $1.001.000. At least, that's what's my logic thinks.
Even so, you should ask yourself, IF Omega was never really wrong before, A) Can it be tricked? and B) would it have taken this possbility into account and made the opposite decision you were going to make? It might as well have, if it cannot be wrong.
Now comes something i just thought out and makes this dilemma truly diabolical:
What if OMEGA itself has the same motivation you have, I.E. maximizing profit, at all costs. If so, it logically, will never put any money in box B to begin with and will work on tricking you to pick box B and ONLY box B. The way the problem is phrased suggests that this is what Omega wants you to do. You would do as it bids and walk away with nothing. Of course if it is its intention to trick you, you can also assume that it's "probability" score is a lie. In this scenario Box B is always empty and everything else is just fluff to make your head spin, and make you pick box B at all costs.
In any case, it circles right back to my initial point: i, personally, would pick both boxes and walk out with a thousand. Because it's the only way that would guarantee profit without being subjected to mindgames and because i'm fricking paranoid just like that. For me, there's NO way that, based on my personality and thought pattern, Box B would not be empty.
Conclusion: Don't effing trust synthetics. EVER. throw them down the airlock.
Feel free to point out the many flaws in my logic plz.
____________
Coincidence? I think not!!!!
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 23, 2013 12:09 AM |
|
|
Lexxan:
Omega has been right a thousand, a million, or a billion times before. The only importance of how often it's been right is to show that it's going to be right in predicting you too, or at least that you should assign a near-zero probability to the outcome being different from what it predicts. It's not physically impossible for Omega to be wrong, but from your knowledge of its previous activity, you should know that it's not going to be wrong in your situation either. That means you can cross out two of the four "possibilities", like this:Quote:
If Omega thinks you're going to take both boxes, and you choose to take both boxes: $1000.
If Omega thinks you're going to take both boxes, and you choose to only take Box B: $0.
If Omega thinks you're going to only take Box B, and you choose to take both boxes: $1,001,000.
If Omega thinks you're going to only take Box B, and you choose to only take Box B: $1,000,000.
Also, if you take Box B, then Box A in addition to it, that counts as taking both boxes. Saying that the optimal strategy is to "pick Box B, then change your mind and take both boxes after Omega has left" is no different from saying that the optimal strategy is to take both boxes - and end up with $1000.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted June 23, 2013 03:11 AM |
|
|
I am still not sure i understand this problem. If you wanted both, and pick B, and get 0, Omega lost because you did not pick what you wanted.
If you wanted B, and picked both, Omega lost again because you again took both of them. So in half of the scenario's, Omega lost.
Then again, its a logic argument, its silly because its made with objectives and rules that makes it silly. Since the first assumption is that Omega already have predicted your choice, the entire paradox is invalid.
____________
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted June 23, 2013 05:59 AM |
|
|
There's no real "right answer". On one hand you will certainly get 1000$ and you have a very low chance to get 1001000$. On the other hand you have a very high chance to get 1000000$ and a very low chance to get nothing. You can make either pick based on statistical information - that Omega was always right before - but you can never be absolutely certain that Omega will be right this time as well so both options remain available. The other way to say this is "There's a 99,(9)% chance that picking B will give you more money".
The question also has another angle but more about it later.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 23, 2013 07:17 AM |
|
|
|
I think the whole thing becomes a paradox (hence, Newcomb's Paradox) when you try to predict Omega's prediction. How can that actually function? If prediction wasn't involved, everybody would simply take both boxes, since you don't have to choose only one.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 23, 2013 07:40 AM |
|
|
I think Omega predicts by assuming you follow the optimal strategy, which is the one that maximizes your payoff. If the optimal strategy is to one-box, the payoff is a million. If the optimal strategy is to two-box, the payoff is a thousand. Therefore, the optimal strategy is to one-box, which is what Omega predicts you'll pick.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 23, 2013 07:45 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 09:17, 23 Jun 2013.
|
|
Without the element of prediction, the optimal thing to do is take both boxes because there is nothing to lose by doing that. The element of prediction (which is actually predicting the prediction) is what complicates things. You can not predict Omega because you are not the omniscient (or almost omniscient by probability) intelligence he is.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 23, 2013 09:38 AM |
|
|
I repeat, it's just a BETTING/PROBABILITY problem.
Since this has been done a lot of times before there are ODDS, and there is a very high, say 99.9 % probability that OMEGA WILL GUESS RIGHT (and a 0.1% prob that he will go wrong).
The two guess right options are 1000 if you pick both boxes, and 1000000, if you pick B.
The two other options have an extremely low prob (netting you zero with B and 10001000 for both).
BETTING-wise, it doesn't make sense to go for an abysmally low chance of WINNING a tad more than what is laughing at you with an extremely high chance, while it makes a lot of sense to risk a very high probability of getting a tad for very low odds to get nothing.
That leaves B as the best BET, because your odds to get away with one million are overwhelmingly good, while, if you go for both, your odds are overwhelmingly in favor of winning 1000.
The low-prob options are basically not existing.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 23, 2013 10:27 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 10:29, 23 Jun 2013.
|
Quote:
BETTING-wise, it doesn't make sense to go for an abysmally low chance of WINNING a tad more than what is laughing at you with an extremely high chance, while it makes a lot of sense to risk a very high probability of getting a tad for very low odds to get nothing.
If we involve human psychology, I would exactly do what you suggest, to hell with a 1000 bucks, a million is life-changing money, if it means I would end up with nothing at such a small risk, then be it. However, all this reasoning exists because we have to predict Omega's prediction. Otherwise, it's a million + 1000 bucks anyway. So does Omega calculate human psychology, if it does, does it also calculate that we calculate this factor. You still end up trying to guess Omega, which is pointless because we are not Omega.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 23, 2013 10:43 AM |
|
|
It's not as complicated as it sounds. What do you want Omega to predict? That you'll pick Box B. Why would it predict that? Because it would be the optimal strategy. So if the optimal strategy is to one-box, you should one-box - and Omega would predict that.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 23, 2013 10:48 AM |
|
|
|
Because WITHOUT Omega, the optimal strategy is to pick both. So, Omega is not just a predictor but a participant.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 23, 2013 11:53 AM |
|
|
I don't think, it's about prediction, it's about PROBABILITY.
We simply have a massive probability in favor of him GETTING IT RIGHT, and it doesn't matter WHY he's getting it right. The only important thing is that the odds are favoring him pinpointing you to make the best decision with a view on money.
That means, the two option, him NOT getting it right are extremely low on probability. Now, the max money possible is handed out when he gets it WRONG, so the probability of you getting the max is non-existant.
See, if you go at that from a different angle, you might harbour the idea that if it IS so, OMEGA is the one forced to assume you will decide for B only and therefore you can SAFELY say BOTH because that will net you 10001000 since he's BOUND to imply that you will pick B, but the problem is that we do not know HOW he manges to get it right basically all the time, only THAT he does it, so this line of thought doesn't really work, since we should assume that people may opt for this option once in a while (we have some who are in favour for that here), which would mean that he was bound to have a history of much less successful prediction capabilities.
So in the end, the best strategy thing is "overruled" ny the "power of the odds" thing: the story of success is too compelling to realistically assume anything else than him outgessing you.
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted September 21, 2013 04:50 PM |
|
|
I was going to say neither, but since this is about maximizing profit and Omega knows what I'm going to take and is never wrong I'll take box B, which Omega knew.
If I took both boxes, I'd only get 1000$, because Omega knew I'd take both.
|
|
idontcare
Known Hero
|
|
posted November 10, 2013 08:05 AM |
|
|
|
box b, hes never wrong, so ill take the monies
|
|
Bones_xa
Known Hero
|
|
posted November 15, 2013 01:16 AM |
|
|
Take Box B. If there is nothing in it, then you take Box A, because he said you could have both!
However, if you open Box B and there is a million in it, then why not open Box A too? as he said there will be a thousand in it.
I'd never believe him that he is 100% correct. So I would most likely take both boxes anyway.
But I'd definitely open Box B first, then depending on whats in it, and whether I needed the money or not, and also on my current mood, I might just leave box A and if at the time I don't really care about $1000. My mood may come into play to make the choice. So good luck predicting that Mr. "I'm never wrong"!
Also as someone mentioned, a person may decide to flip a coin. (It would probably be rare that someone would do that, but still possible). And there is no way he could predict that outcome with 100% accuracy, a coin flip is random, pretty much.
Another thing too is that if the goal is to maximize the amount of money you get, then the only way to do that is to take both boxes, because one million + one thousand is > than one million.
|
|
idontcare
Known Hero
|
|
posted November 15, 2013 01:55 AM |
|
|
but $1000 vs $1000000 is a pretty low profit.
All comes down to, are you able to change your "software", so in the moment he figures you, he figures that you would only take box b, everything after that is miniscule in the whole theme.
If you are unable to sell him that you are bboxing, you loose a chunk of potential profit, so the most profitable turn for you is to do that software-programming. If you dont do that, you dont maximize your profits, therefore you dont fullfill his conditions of making the most profitable move.
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted November 15, 2013 02:24 AM |
|
Edited by Celfious at 03:00, 15 Nov 2013.
|
The omega seems nice, I am going to listen to omega and determine to not make him wrong by taking box A after I go with only box B
I'd be like, thanks !! Million bucks!!! I am coool with that and I am not trying to outsmart you in any way. Nor would I try to disresppect such a nice random gesture by grabbing box A afterwards.
Thank you omega 
(edited after idontcare asked "what?" )
____________
What are you up to
|
|
idontcare
Known Hero
|
|
posted November 15, 2013 02:45 AM |
|
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 15, 2013 03:25 AM |
|
|
Quote:
I'd never believe him that he is 100% correct. So I would most likely take both boxes anyway.
You don't know if he's 100% correct, but you do know he's done this millions of times and has never been wrong. Are you willing to bet so much money on him being wrong this one time?
Also, if he predicts that you'll choose randomly, Box B will be empty.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
| |
|
|
