Is Newcomb's paradox worth our time?
Hi! Please check wikipedia for a description of the "paradox": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newcomb%27s _problem I've seen endless debate on wether to be a one-boxer or a two-boxer. The problem is based on the possibility of existence of the predictor. To convince us it can exist it's pointed out "unlimited budget", repeated experiment etc. And also: the predictor can "simply" pick up some detail about the player that correlate with being a one-boxer or a two-boxer... but we do not only make decisions based on who we are, we also adapt to the situation at hand. Here the player has to guess what the predictor guessed they would guess about the predictor trying to guess what the player will guess and to so on to infinity. So no matter how smart the predictor is, some questions can't logically be answered. Like giving the truth status to the statement "this statement is false". Newcomb's paradox hides its self-referencing nature behind "the predictor is accurate don't you worry about it" or "the player is the type of person to" as if the player was not going to think.