I don’t see how two-boxing is a Nash equilibrium. Are you saying you should two-box in a transparent Newcomb’s problem if Omega has predicted you will two-box? Isn’t this pretty much analogous to counterfactual mugging, where UDT says we should one-box?
Sorry, I wrote some nonsense in another comment and then deleted it. I guess the point is that UDT (which I agree with) recommends non-equilibrium behavior in this case.
I don’t see how two-boxing is a Nash equilibrium. Are you saying you should two-box in a transparent Newcomb’s problem if Omega has predicted you will two-box? Isn’t this pretty much analogous to counterfactual mugging, where UDT says we should one-box?
Sorry, I wrote some nonsense in another comment and then deleted it. I guess the point is that UDT (which I agree with) recommends non-equilibrium behavior in this case.