I one box newcombs problem because the payoffs are too disproportionate to make it interesting. how about this?
if omega predicted you would two box they are both empty
if omega predicted you would one box both boxes have $1000
That payoff matrix doesn’t preserve the form of the problem. One of the features of the problem is that whatever is in box B, you’re better off two-boxing than one-boxing if you ignore the influence of Omega’s prediction. A better formulation would be that box A has $1000, and Box B has $2000 iff Omega believes you will one-box. Box B has to potentially have more than box A, or there’s no point in one-boxing what ever DT you have.
I one box newcombs problem because the payoffs are too disproportionate to make it interesting. how about this? if omega predicted you would two box they are both empty if omega predicted you would one box both boxes have $1000
That payoff matrix doesn’t preserve the form of the problem. One of the features of the problem is that whatever is in box B, you’re better off two-boxing than one-boxing if you ignore the influence of Omega’s prediction. A better formulation would be that box A has $1000, and Box B has $2000 iff Omega believes you will one-box. Box B has to potentially have more than box A, or there’s no point in one-boxing what ever DT you have.