A newcomb’s problem set with a gratuitous infallible predictor is inferior to a newcomb’s problem set with a currently-implementable but imperfect prediction algorithm. Wouldn’t you agree?
No, in maths you want to pick the simplest possible thing that embodies the principle you want to study, needless complications are distracting. Throwing in a probabilistic element to something that works fine as a deterministic problem is needless.
No, in maths you want to pick the simplest possible thing that embodies the principle you want to study, needless complications are distracting. Throwing in a probabilistic element to something that works fine as a deterministic problem is needless.
Typo?
Yes, thanks