Well, uh… that is rather an important aspect of the scenario…
Sure. But given the note, I had the knowledge needed already, it seems. But whatever.
Indeed, the predictor doesn’t have to predict anything to make me lose $100; it can just place the bomb in the left box, period. This then boils down to a simple threat: “pay $100 or die!”. Hardly a tricky decision theory problem…
Didn’t say it was a tricky decision problem. My point was that your strategy is easily exploitable and may therefore not be a good strategy.
If your strategy is “always choose Left”, then a malevolent “predictor” can put a bomb in Left and be guaranteed to kill you. That seems much worse than being mugged for $100.
I don’t see how that’s relevant. In the original problem, you’ve been placed in this weird situation against your will, where something bad will happen to you (either the loss of $100 or … death). If we’re supposing that the predictor is malevolent, she could certainly do all sorts of things… are we assuming that the predictor is constrained in some way? Clearly, she can make mistakes, so that opens up her options to any kind of thing you like. In any case, your choice (by construction) is as stated: pay $100, or die.
Sure. But given the note, I had the knowledge needed already, it seems. But whatever.
Didn’t say it was a tricky decision problem. My point was that your strategy is easily exploitable and may therefore not be a good strategy.
If your strategy is “always choose Left”, then a malevolent “predictor” can put a bomb in Left and be guaranteed to kill you. That seems much worse than being mugged for $100.
The problem description explicitly states the predictor doesn’t do that, so no.
I don’t see how that’s relevant. In the original problem, you’ve been placed in this weird situation against your will, where something bad will happen to you (either the loss of $100 or … death). If we’re supposing that the predictor is malevolent, she could certainly do all sorts of things… are we assuming that the predictor is constrained in some way? Clearly, she can make mistakes, so that opens up her options to any kind of thing you like. In any case, your choice (by construction) is as stated: pay $100, or die.
You don’t see how the problem description preventing it is relevant?
The description doesn’t prevent malevolence, but it does prevent putting a bomb in left if the agent left-boxes.