Holy shit, I just realized that looking from a TDT perspective, a Parfit’s Hitchhiker, a Newcomb’s Problem and ye olde one-shot PD… are more or less the same challenge, just with a few variables changed! They all can be resolved optimally and consistently only by being something, not just doing something.
Obvious in hindsight (that’s sort of what EY has been meaning with that whole sequence), but there you go.
Holy shit, I just realized that looking from a TDT perspective, a Parfit’s Hitchhiker, a Newcomb’s Problem and ye olde one-shot PD… are more or less the same challenge, just with a few variables changed! They all can be resolved optimally and consistently only by being something, not just doing something.
Sometimes we even just lump them in as “Newcomblike” and be done.
Holy shit, I just realized that looking from a TDT perspective, a Parfit’s Hitchhiker, a Newcomb’s Problem and ye olde one-shot PD… are more or less the same challenge, just with a few variables changed! They all can be resolved optimally and consistently only by being something, not just doing something.
Obvious in hindsight (that’s sort of what EY has been meaning with that whole sequence), but there you go.
Sometimes we even just lump them in as “Newcomblike” and be done.
Yeah, it’s also obvious now. I used to think that “Newcomblike” referred strictly to variations upon the “Omega and boxes” set-up.