Not sure this framing really “explodes” consequentialism as predicted, even though it shows tailored Omega scenarios can adversarially exploit CDT. I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on whether it can be proved that UDT will always do at least as well as CDT. Personally, I lean towards the notion of CDT being vulnerable but not dominated here.
Fair point, I see now that dominance is the wrong framing. I’m still curious about what this would add for someone already biting the bullet on counterfactual mugging. If CDT proponents know they lose in Omega scenarios, what about this refined version should update them?
Not sure this framing really “explodes” consequentialism as predicted, even though it shows tailored Omega scenarios can adversarially exploit CDT. I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on whether it can be proved that UDT will always do at least as well as CDT. Personally, I lean towards the notion of CDT being vulnerable but not dominated here.
Asking whether one algorithm is dominant over another algorithm is underspecified without choosing a particular domain.
Fair point, I see now that dominance is the wrong framing. I’m still curious about what this would add for someone already biting the bullet on counterfactual mugging. If CDT proponents know they lose in Omega scenarios, what about this refined version should update them?
In Counterfactual Mugging, which option counts as “biting the bullet”?