I had never heard of this before, looked it up on Wikipedia and figured immediately that the only real question is how accurate the prediction function is. If you know it's inaccurate, take both; if you know it's accurate, take B. If you don't know, take B.
-
-
-
Exactly same here -- wikipedia says "reliable predictor" therefore, you take B.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Choosing 2 boxes is based on the idea that the choice can't cause the [previous] loading of the boxes. In the quantum realm we already have evidence that causality is more complex than that; what if the aliens knew how to use it?

#OneBox https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8gQ5GNk16s … HT@fermilab -
(Basically the quantum eraser experiment, if understood to a point where it could be turned into a technology, would allow the aliens to create a box-loading system that used the [future] choice to load the money. This would get around Newcomb's paradox by reversing causality.
)
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.