which answer do you choose in this puzzle? (xo engagement bait)
| project bluebeam foot soldier | 03/10/26 | | project bluebeam foot soldier | 03/10/26 | | project bluebeam foot soldier | 03/10/26 | | China | 03/10/26 | | richard clock | 03/10/26 | | @grok, is this true? | 03/10/26 | | spiritually female godfather | 03/10/26 | | project bluebeam foot soldier | 03/10/26 | | spiritually female godfather | 03/10/26 | | project bluebeam foot soldier | 03/10/26 | | spiritually female godfather | 03/10/26 | | project bluebeam foot soldier | 03/10/26 | | spiritually female godfather | 03/10/26 | | project bluebeam foot soldier | 03/10/26 | | spiritually female godfather | 03/10/26 | | Fucking Fuckface | 03/10/26 | | peeface | 03/10/26 | | project bluebeam foot soldier | 03/10/26 | | Waingro | 03/10/26 | | Wes Scantlin | 03/10/26 | | things from the 90s/00s so ethereal and dreamlike: | 03/10/26 | | jonathan penis | 03/10/26 | | project bluebeam foot soldier | 03/10/26 | | lex | 03/10/26 | | project bluebeam foot soldier | 03/10/26 | | goyim in abundanceeeeee | 03/10/26 | | tancredi marchiolo | 03/10/26 | | project bluebeam foot soldier | 03/10/26 | | goyim in abundanceeeeee | 03/10/26 | | tancredi marchiolo | 03/10/26 | | goyim in abundanceeeeee | 03/10/26 | | project bluebeam foot soldier | 03/10/26 | | tancredi marchiolo | 03/10/26 | | things from the 90s/00s so ethereal and dreamlike: | 03/10/26 | | richard clock | 03/10/26 | | fatty nigger | 03/10/26 | | spiritually female godfather | 03/10/26 | | Nude Karlstack | 03/10/26 | | fatty nigger | 03/10/26 | | Nazca Redlines | 03/10/26 | | project bluebeam foot soldier | 03/10/26 | | spiritually female godfather | 03/10/26 | | project bluebeam foot soldier | 03/10/26 | | richard clock | 03/10/26 | | spiritually female godfather | 03/10/26 | | project bluebeam foot soldier | 03/10/26 | | spiritually female godfather | 03/10/26 | | project bluebeam foot soldier | 03/10/26 | | spiritually female godfather | 03/10/26 | | Fucking Fuckface | 03/10/26 | | project bluebeam foot soldier | 03/10/26 | | spiritually female godfather | 03/10/26 | | project bluebeam foot soldier | 03/10/26 | | jonathan penis | 03/10/26 | | Nazca Redlines | 03/10/26 | | project bluebeam foot soldier | 03/10/26 | | richard clock | 03/10/26 | | project bluebeam foot soldier | 03/10/26 | | cypher | 03/10/26 | | spiritually female godfather | 03/10/26 | | goyim in abundanceeeeee | 03/10/26 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: March 10th, 2026 11:59 AM Author: project bluebeam foot soldier
TOTAL VOTES:
BOX A ONLY: 7
BOTH BOXES: 2
----------------------------------
Setup: You walk into a room. There are two boxes.
Box A (opaque) — contains either $1,000,000 or $0.
Box B (transparent) — contains $1,000 (you can see this).
A highly reliable, God-Like AI Predictor (almost always right) has already predicted, before you walked into the room, whether you will take only Box A or both boxes. Its prediction includes the assumption that you will be aware of the rules of the game and of it making this prediction.
If the Predictor predicted you will take only Box A, they put $1,000,000 in Box A.
If the Predictor predicted you will take both boxes, they put $0 in Box A.
Now the boxes are in front of you. You must choose right now, and your choice does not affect the Predictor anymore (the prediction and the filling already happened).
--------------------------------
Do you take only Box A (hoping for $1,000,000), or do you take both Box A and Box B (guaranteeing the $1,000 but possibly losing the million, but with a higher maximum payoff of $1,001,000)? Why?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5843901&forum_id=2",#49731649) |
 |
Date: March 10th, 2026 12:57 PM Author: spiritually female godfather (gunneratttt)
i misread the hypo and thought i could only choose one.
id take both. the predictor would predict any rational person would take both, so it wouldn't matter, but its costless to see if it made an error since it's almost always right.
unless the predictor is in the first leg too (the predictor is predicited which move id take with a predictor). now im in a game of golden balls with essentially an ai clone. in which case id go with A, because $1000 is inconsequential and i think theres a greater than 1:1000 chance the predictor would think id choose that, so it's positive EV.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5843901&forum_id=2",#49731834) |
 |
Date: March 10th, 2026 1:23 PM Author: project bluebeam foot soldier
dude, what? lol
what exact same situation? isolation from what? huh?
the predictor is predicting (with 99.99999%+ accuracy) which choice you will make based on the rules of the game laid out in op. not sure if this helps or not
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5843901&forum_id=2",#49731909) |
 |
Date: March 10th, 2026 1:37 PM Author: spiritually female godfather (gunneratttt)
your hypo is ambiguous about whether the predictor is predicting whether id take both boxes if there was no predictor (just two boxes, i can have one or both, no information about the odds of what's in box a or how that wad decided) or whether it's predicting what i would do under the exact same circumstances (with a predictor).
then i misred the question as "do you take A or B" instead of "do you take A or both?" under my A or B reading, the 100% correct answer would be B, and i thought you were asking this to see how many people would choose incorrectly because $1k is insignificant
if i had read your question correctly the context clue would have resolved the ambiguity. it was a rc fail on my part.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5843901&forum_id=2",#49731956) |
 |
Date: March 10th, 2026 2:01 PM Author: spiritually female godfather (gunneratttt)
yes i understood that a few poasts ago and said id take A.
i would choose A because $1k is inconsequential. im truly engaging in this hypo by *not* thinking of it further than that. if i choose A based on my gut, legitimately, not trying to game the predictor as it has already put/not put the money in A, then there's at least a chance the predictor would have predicted that (and under your hypo it *did* do that, because it was legitimately my first instinct.)
its kinda like quantum mechanics. the longer i think about it, the more likely i am to reach an optimal answer, which could be both. thus my actions right now do impact what the predictor has already done.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5843901&forum_id=2",#49732051) |
Date: March 10th, 2026 2:21 PM Author: Nazca Redlines
On the one hand, this is kind of a twise on the Monty Hall problem, in which taking both boxes would be cr given that the AI has already made its prediction. On the other hand, Box A only is cr, and I'm taking Box A only.
The rational choice for someone (a) who can think through the excercise and (b) for whom $1,000 is nbd is to take only Box A and hope the AI sees that you would see it that way.
The answer might change if the AI is predicting for a random, average person, who is more likely to take both boxes.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5843901&forum_id=2",#49732114) |
 |
Date: March 10th, 2026 3:08 PM Author: spiritually female godfather (gunneratttt)
tyvm
most poasters are very insecure about ever being wrong online. only like 15 people participated in my election guessing game where i offered a $50 giftcard. yet hundreds will make vague, non-falsiable "predictions."
from the face of the hypo most can tell its somewhat complicated and that there might be an objectively correct answer. and they'd rather not risk damage to their e-rep.
it's a lawyer forum, no suprise many are risk adverse bothboxmos
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5843901&forum_id=2",#49732273) |
Date: March 10th, 2026 3:14 PM Author: goyim in abundanceeeeee
Can you replace AI in the hypo with something that better illustrates the point you're trying to make? Because it's the most crucial part of the hypo and it's still unclear. If you just said there's a box with a thousand and a box with zero or a million it comes down simply to risk tolerance and necessity. If someone desperately needed a grand they don't risk taking box A.
It's also totally unclear why someone would take both boxes or not, and if this has any effect on the chance the computer decides they were worthy or not of leaving the million.
The hypo is totally broken because it comes down to whether or not we trust the decision making ability of a computer, which may or may not be right or wrong, and can't even be proven to be so until after you've taken a box or boxes. The whole hypo suffers from a lack of clarity. Is it just a sword in a stone situation where we're just hoping the robot deems us worthy? I fail to see why there's any point in guessing what a robot thinks of us. Wouldn't it then follow that the optimal strategy would be to appeal to the robot's inner sense of goodness enough to leave the million in the first box? That's what we're left with ultimately, and, perhaps, unfortunately.
If you're insinuating that the best course is to take Box B, prove the computer right about the goodness of humanity so that it must leave the million, then build a time machine and go back in time to take the first box, then I think you could have articulated that a lot better.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5843901&forum_id=2",#49732292) |
|
|