Your remark seems ridiculous. As Relsqui mentions, there is a distinction between changing your probability estimate of others’ decisions and changing their decisions.
The fact that EDT has troubles with these sorts of distinctions is, afaik, generally considered a weakness of EDT.
If I read your argument correctly, you are saying that “given that omega uses EDT your decisions acausally affect the others’ decisions which you are unaware of.” Again; this seems patently ridiculous and an argument for nothing except that “omega doesn’t use EDT and neither should you.”
So is this just a sarcastic remark about EDT? Or are you positing something?
It’s a serious remark about EDT. I agree with EDT and with this conclusion about it.
Your remark seems ridiculous. As Relsqui mentions, there is a distinction between changing your probability estimate of others’ decisions and changing their decisions.
The fact that EDT has troubles with these sorts of distinctions is, afaik, generally considered a weakness of EDT.
If I read your argument correctly, you are saying that “given that omega uses EDT your decisions acausally affect the others’ decisions which you are unaware of.” Again; this seems patently ridiculous and an argument for nothing except that “omega doesn’t use EDT and neither should you.”