# Difference between revisions of "Talk:Newcomb's problem"

From Lesswrongwiki

Chimerablack (talk | contribs) |
Chimerablack (talk | contribs) |
||

Line 5: | Line 5: | ||

This is a poor representation of the paradox to where it's basically not a paradox. The answer for this is always take the one box. If he has never been wrong "many" times, that could be 50 or it could be 100,000,000 or so it's essentially infinite. so the probability of him being right is 99.99% repeated. | This is a poor representation of the paradox to where it's basically not a paradox. The answer for this is always take the one box. If he has never been wrong "many" times, that could be 50 or it could be 100,000,000 or so it's essentially infinite. so the probability of him being right is 99.99% repeated. | ||

− | But historical determinism is not a logical basis for decision making. But if you are the 0.01% where he is wrong, you only lose 1,000. If you take two and he's correct as is likely -- you lose 1,000,000 in opportunity cost. | + | But historical determinism is not a logical basis for decision making. But if you are the 0.01% where he is wrong, you only lose 1,000. If you take two and he's correct as is likely -- you lose 1,000,000 in opportunity cost. It can't be written correctly... |

− | |||

− |

## Latest revision as of 13:31, 27 September 2016

[Needs to be renamed to Newcomb's PROBLEM. This is the standard term. --EY.]

- Moved this comment from article to talk space. Looks like "problem" is standard on LW/OB according to the links, so will move as suggested though obviously no way to verify that EY is EY. Ciphergoth 13:21, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

"Has never been wrong" does not imply "has been right". Needs something extra. --wedrifid

This is a poor representation of the paradox to where it's basically not a paradox. The answer for this is always take the one box. If he has never been wrong "many" times, that could be 50 or it could be 100,000,000 or so it's essentially infinite. so the probability of him being right is 99.99% repeated. But historical determinism is not a logical basis for decision making. But if you are the 0.01% where he is wrong, you only lose 1,000. If you take two and he's correct as is likely -- you lose 1,000,000 in opportunity cost. It can't be written correctly...