disbelief that the predictor could be all that good.
In particular they don’t believe in a Laplace’s Demon type of superpredictor that can foresee all physical events, and infer a future psychological history from them, including seemingly spontaneous changes of mind. They instead see the predictor as a Derren Brown style psychologist with basically human abilities.
If you consider a variation of the game where the predictor just accepts a promise from the player to one- or two- box, then the best strategy is to say you are going to one box, and then two box. Similarly, if the predictor is rather superficial and only reads the players intention at the start of the game, the player can also get the extra money by changing their mind.
So maybe there is a way of simulating two boxing with players that change strategy, and predictors that operate off limited information , like the first N runs.
Two boxing seems to be based on a mixture of:-
disbelief in backwards causation
belief in free will
disbelief that the predictor could be all that good.
In particular they don’t believe in a Laplace’s Demon type of superpredictor that can foresee all physical events, and infer a future psychological history from them, including seemingly spontaneous changes of mind. They instead see the predictor as a Derren Brown style psychologist with basically human abilities.
If you consider a variation of the game where the predictor just accepts a promise from the player to one- or two- box, then the best strategy is to say you are going to one box, and then two box. Similarly, if the predictor is rather superficial and only reads the players intention at the start of the game, the player can also get the extra money by changing their mind.
So maybe there is a way of simulating two boxing with players that change strategy, and predictors that operate off limited information , like the first N runs.