There is no need for time-invariance. The most generic model (2 Joe nodes; 1 Kate note; 3 Nature nodes) of vanilla decision theory perfectly explains the situation you’re talking about—unless you postulate some causal loops.
And in Kavka’s problem there’s no paradox unless we assume causal loops (billionaire knows now if you’re going to decide to drink the toxin or not tomorrow), or leave the problem ambiguous (so can you change or mind or not?).
There is no need for time-invariance. The most generic model (2 Joe nodes; 1 Kate note; 3 Nature nodes) of vanilla decision theory perfectly explains the situation you’re talking about—unless you postulate some causal loops.
Is that not the simplicity you’re interested in?
And in Kavka’s problem there’s no paradox unless we assume causal loops (billionaire knows now if you’re going to decide to drink the toxin or not tomorrow), or leave the problem ambiguous (so can you change or mind or not?).
You’ll notice I didn’t once use the word “paradox” ;)