A Problem You'll Never Solve
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 02. 2019
- Newcomb’s Paradox has confounded philosophers, mathematicians, and game players for over 50 years. The problem is simple: You can take Box A, which contains $1,000, and Box B, which contains either $0 or $1,000,000, or you can just take Box B. The right choice seems obvious -- but there’s a catch.
Before you play, an omniscient being has predicted whether you’d take both Box A and Box B or only Box B. If he’s predicted that you’ll take both, he’s put $0 in Box B. If he predicts that you’ll only take Box B, he’s put $1,000,000 inside. So… what do you do?
I explore the two approaches to this problem, one based on the math of expected utility and the other based on a logical dominance principle. Newcomb’s Paradox raises questions about free will and determinism as it explores whether a problem with no solution might be easier than a problem with two perfectly valid contradictory solutions.
** SOURCES **
“Newcomb's Problem And Two Principles Of Choice,” by Robert Nozick
faculty.arts.ubc.ca/rjohns/noz...
Newcomb’s Paradox poll results from The Guardian:
www.theguardian.com/science/a...
** LINKS **
Grandayy Links
CZcams: / grandayy
Twitter: / grandayy
Vsauce2 Links
Twitter: / vsaucetwo
Facebook: / vsaucetwo
Hosted, Produced, And Edited by Kevin Lieber
Instagram: / kevlieber
Twitter: / kevinlieber
Research And Writing by Matthew Tabor
/ matthewktabor
Huge Thanks To Paula Lieber
www.etsy.com/shop/Craftality
Get Vsauce's favorite science and math toys delivered to your door!
www.curiositybox.com/
Select Music By Jake Chudnow: / jakechudnow
MY PODCAST -- THE CREATE UNKNOWN
/ thecreateunknown
Here's Robert Nozick's paper if you'd like to read more about this problem. faculty.arts.ubc.ca/rjohns/nozick_newcomb.pdf
And I think his description of the accuracy of the predictor is an important factor when one makes a choice: "You know that this being has often correctly predicted your choices in the past (and has never, so far as you know, made an incorrect prediction about your choices), and further-more you know that this being has often correctly predicted the choices of other people, many of whom are similar to you, in the particular situation to be described below."
Here. You can have either one box of diabetes, or you can have two boxes of diabetes! Which one would you choose?
both
Thanks for everything. I love you, keep it going!
what book is this chapter taken from? I might want to buy that book for lets say... 1000 bucks ;)
Me: Yes, obviously both
Kevin: A magical genie predicted that and makes B worth 0
Me: That seems like it was an important part of the setup
I had the same thought! Where the f*** the genie come from?
Right? The first proposed game and the paradox are not the same thing.
yeah, because with the genie as a fortune zeller this no longer is set in stone but rather is a schrödingers cat type of problem
Yeah, this was just complete and utter bollocks. The genine is a complete non-factor and the entire 'Expected Utility' side of things actually agrees with the Stragetic Dominance if you give both options and equal chance.
@@ericlaska4748 omniscient means they know all there is a 0% chance they dont know
*Chooses only box A*
Genie: Wait, that's illegal
SO DID I
I chose box A as well.... box A is like 20% full... there's no way a million candies fit in Box B, therefor it must be empty !!!!
The Purity of Chaos 420 likes m8
...why wouldn't you also take box B? You get your 1,000 plus potentially more.
@@NStripleseven well there's a 90% chance he predicts that you choose both and puts 0$ so if you're gonna choose both, you might as well just pick only box B to increase your chances of the million
Kevin: Will you choose box B or both boxes?
Me: Both
Kevin: Now let me introduce the genie
Me: well fu too then
"What the f**k? Where in the world did this guy come from?"
_-everyone_
Yeah this whole thing is nonsense
I agree. Total and utter nonsense.
it's kind of a flawed question though, right? It really depends on how smart the genie is, if he is omniscient then choosing the second box is always the best choice.
Ye the question provides two possible problems each with a solution, their isn’t two ways of solving the problem it’s just that their are two possible problems provided
@@timayovyk2036 What two problems are you talking about? The problem is which box to choose, and this is 100% determinant on the omniscence of the genie.
@@thequantaleaper two problems, one where the genie exists and one where he doesn't.
also if the genie's omniscence is variable then the problem is multivariable and thus obviously cannot be answered with a single answer.
Well no because the choice is already there.
What the genie predicted doesn’t matter, he already predicted it, your choice isn’t going to change his prediction.
They are completely unrelated events, like how being accurate at betting on football doesn’t affect how well the sports team you betted for does.
@@brandonbombplays9304 But that isn't really the case, right? I get the point, and in the normal world without genies that would be correct, however as the genie has "improved" odds of predicting the correct outcome, your decision is part of the genies prediction.
I choose box A. I'm not interested in the Genie's bullsh1t.
But... You can't...
it's rewind time
Yes he can
i actually chose a because 1mil of those cant fit in box b lol
Exactly
vsauce: or is it?
vsauce 2: WRONG
Vsauce 3: I dOnT KnOW
Lol
@@QuicksolutionsOnline lolest
Dana nice
You're tottaly right
And this is why I love vsauce 2
The real question is, why would I really need 1,000,000 candies.
Thats a heart attack waiting to happen
1,000,000 dollars though...
in order to obtain type two diabetes
Halloween?
obtaining cavities in every tooth
The issue with strategic dominance in this scenario is that it has a fixed view of time, whereas in this situation, your choice has some effect on what is in the mystery box despite the contents already being decided.
Candy doesn't magically appear or disappear. The genie may be able to predict, but he’s already made the prediction and that can’t change.
No the issue is with the question, because of the fact that it doesn’t confirm which scenario is taking place; the genie is predicting/ the genie is not predicting.
Because if this some people choose one scenario to go by and others choose the other, both strategies are valid because there are two potential problems, not two ways of solving them
@@timayovyk2036 the genie is predicting, it’s just the that he already predicted, your choice doesn’t matter.
If it did, that would be like saying a coin landed on heads because an hour earlier you predicted it would.
They’re just 2 completely unrelated events, like how betting on a football game doesn’t actually affect the players.
@@brandonbombplays9304 that makes the 90% chance of the genie getting it right meaningless. Either he has a 90% chance of getting it right or not. The puzzle states he has, so we have to take that as truth. Therefore, if you take both boxes there's a 90% chance box B is empty. The best outcome is if the genie predicts you'll only choose box B, but then you choose both, but this only happens 10% of the time. The most reliable outcome is if the genie's prediction matches your actions, and the most profitable way for this to work is only choosing box B. By thinking you should choose both boxes, you're screwing yourself over, because the genie can predict that you will do this. Choose box B only, and there's a 90% chance you're a millionaire. The $1000 dollars is not worth changing that 90% to 10%.
@@Owen_loves_Butters but the genie is magical. its not just a coin toss. uour choices in the future change the past because the genie is magical. a fixed view of time means future actions don't effect the past and thats why it fail here.
Kevin: you will take both boxes right?
Me: *knowing kevin* WRONG
Kevin: RIGHT
Me: right?
Kevin: Wrong
Always one step ahead
@@guillaumelagueyte1019 since you watched this recently if your confused its choose both boxes because if he put what was in it before hand no matter what your decision is you will always get what he thought its out of your control once your making the decision so choose both bc its up to him if he gives you the 1mil or not hopefully that made sense
Dvst lol
I know, that threw me off hard lmao
@@VoxSpark But if the genie is right 90% of the time, wouldn't it be better to choose box b?
Kevin the type of guy to actually count out 1000 candies.
Yonatan Moritz he probably did
Or mr beast
Yonatan Moritz
Z
This comment goes on a Trick2g video
Better than watching a pot boil
The problem is also that it’s never really made clear if the participant *knows* about the genie’s powers, or if the scenario is presents as it was in the first bit of the video. And if you know, can you outsmart the genie by thinking really hard about choosing one option and then switching suddenly? Can you mind-battle the genie? Or are you unaware of the genie the whole time?
I've heard it set up before with a supercomputer instead of a genie, and the player knows that the supercomputer has performed this test many times and never yet been wrong. But the player doesn't know the odds, only that it has so far always been right. That I think removes those narrative ambiguities and gets at the actual math and logic the problem is meant to propose.
Still love the narrative flair of Kevin's videos though!
I'd choose both boxes and give the mystery box to orphaned children saying it's a gift from Grandayy, and that we'll split it 50/50. Now, Grandayy has no choice but to fill the box with candy, or he'll be making some orphans very, very sad. That way I get 501k candy, orphans get 500k candy, and Grandayy can sleep at night. Everyone wins.
I think you are aware of the genie, bit the genie didn't see your whole reasoning, he just saw the moment where you took either both boxes or box B
"mind-battle the genie" is the name of my new album
It always comes down to the accuracy of the prediction, if we know how often he is right we can do the math and figure out the best choice (box b method).
If we dont know how often he is right we might as well pick both of them, since he could always be wrong.
The aperant contradiction lies in the question that omited this crucial information to solve the problem. Therefore both explanations are correct given their assumptions and there is no contradiction
Definitely. Solution 1 assumes near omniscience, which just isn't realistic. Solution 2 is more grounded in reality so I'd choose that every time.
We can knew that the genie is right 90% of the time (like in the video) and 50% of the people still take two boxes (because the prediction is already make and they choise can not change it)
Even if you assume 100% accuracy the paradox doesn't go away. It doesn't change the crucial fact that the prediction has already happened by the time you make your choice- that if the candy is in the box it's already there and can't go away.
@@warron24 That's a contradiction. If the genie can predict with 100% certainty then your choice by definition is locked with his prediction because his prediction cannot be incorrect. If he predicted you'd choose only box B but then you choose both boxes then his prediction wasn't 100% accurate was it?
@@ceasebenjaminbeast3947 I commented this as well, but I think this is why the paradox here is more about how omniscience is contradictory to our perception of reality and logic rather than anything to do with mathematics.
I choose only box A. There is clearly not enough room for 1,000,000 candy in box B!
Very, very small candy. Basically just sugar crystals.
@@Grey_Warden_Invasion But then it's just a powder. Not worth it! :D
Thought the same
@@that_random_dude pixy stix
eating 1m candies is equal to 1m cocaine lol
The problem is that original question contains no information about a genie.
right? I've seen Vsauce2 do this multiple times with paradoxes, he'll ask some question that you think is ridiculously easy to answer and then he claims it's not that easy because of this new information you had no clue about. It entirely changes the situation and the way anyone would choose.
He's the secret son of Jessica Fletcher.
@@SpydersByte do you want 100 dollars or not? You want it? LOL WRONG! Because if you choose not to take the 100$ you'll get this Lamborghini here in my garage up in the Hollywood Hills.
@@SpydersByte I also don't quite understand how this is a paradox. Who actually decides that the genie is right 90% of the time? This problem only works out this way because of this value. Without a genie there would be no paradox, and as genies generally don't seem to be existing, or at least no one has proven they have, this isn't an actual problem.
AlmostProPlays that's how the problem is stated. The predicting player is *_supposed to_* be able to predict the future... Although, how much confidence you have in their ability is a different matter altogether. :-)
I’m mad there wasn’t a poll
It's a perfectly all-knowing genie at first, right? So the whole "but he's already put the candy in or he hasn't" premise doesn't hold. It breaks causality, therefore is no longer a game between the genie and me, but just a choice for me.
Yeah, I think the perspective is a bit screwy. It's a game where the genie is able to know your expected move with some degree of certainty and is able to make a unilateral shift before you make your move. Genie's only win condition seems to be making a correct prediction.
Like if you look at it from a prisoner's dilemma scenario, the genie will never make a shift to betray if he has predicted you will cooperate since his rewards are different. But if he predicts that you will betray (take both boxes) then he will make a unilateral shift to betray. The "take both" argument supposes that the genie has to make a move and then you make a move when the framing is presented as essentially being the genie moves after you and knows your move.
@@Zetact_ ye I agree too... the whole point seems to be that the genie can guess your rational, so by using the rational of taking both boxes, you are just "convincing yourself" of something taht is already predetermined. It's like those movie situations where by trying to avoid your destiny, that's what makes it happen.
You say "I'll take both because he may have already filled them or not, so I get 1000 or 1001000,", but that is exactly what the genie has already predicted, so you always get 1000 if you choose both boxes... and you always get 1000000 if you choose just box B, because he already said so aswell... So it's always best to choose just B.
This is assuming ofc that the genie is always 100% certain, which is the part that (in my opinion) makes this even worth debate. If the genie only has a "chance" of guessing, then it's no longer a "paradox" or mind game.. you just make the calculations and see what is the best chance.
Take only box A. Confuse and disturb the Basilisk.
Literally what I would have done.
Why gamble over probability when certainty sits within arm's reach. The whole thing is a concept of greed. Humility would simply take the A upfront. There is no need to get greedy when you are being given something as is.
@@featheredseclude6512 But if someone is giving you more - why won't you take? I know if it's just your friend - you won't take. But if it's a billionaire stranger?
why would I want to be on team B or team AB when I can be on the A-Team
@@featheredseclude6512 why lol. You're guaranteed 1,000 whether you choose a, or ab. One just gives you a chance of 1,000,000 more
@@ooberific6921 but what about taxes.
11:00 Genie's a freakin' liar, he put 18 candies inside the mystery box
*19
Guru Sachdev it’s 18
@@gurusachdev2560 18
Twen1 0ne
@TunTun ;)
I think the expected value equation can be used to prove either case. If the genie is right most of the time, it is better to take just box B. If the genie is wrong most of the time, it is better to pick both. So I don't think this is so much an unanswerable question as it is a question that does not provide enough information to come to a provably better solution.
Take only Box B and hope it has no candy in it.
(if you don't like jelly beans)
Sell the jelly beans
The candies are skittles.
Inverse Newcomb hahaha!
Host: "For tonight's show, we have two boxes, one contains $1000, and the other one containing either nothing or $1.000.000! Now, guest, would you like the second box or both of them? "
Guest/Me: "Hold on a sec, I need something to write on. Also, how psychic are you? Like, what percent exactly?"
That's a completely different scenario though because in yours we don't know the mechanism behind what determines whether the second box is filled or not. Of course you would 2 box in yours, you lack enough information to do otherwise. But in the video's scenario, not only do we know how the second box gets filled, the criteria depends on a prediction of our own future actions, which means there are better ways of maximizing our expected value than just relying on random chance. Furthermore, your scenario doesn't preclude playing iteratively, which means if we studied it and played long enough we might be able to figure out what determines when the second box is filled and adjust our strategy accordingly.
Возьму две коробки 100% выиграю 1000$ и возможно ещё немного ( или много).
Одинаковый процент удачи/неудачи
@Miron Samoilov ... Я выберу коробку А. Так как зная свою удачу я проиграю))))
sykomantis He’s talking based on the video, and what they discussed. The mechanism in there, is what he is talking about. He doesn’t have to specify it since we viewed 12 minutes of full video to get to this point. Anyway, you really didn’t have to make that reply because it was just a joke, and kind of mocking the percentage that came out of NOwHERE
@Miron Samoilov хотя нет, 1000$ я могу заработать, а вот 1 000 000$ мне бы помогли)) я выберу коробку B
The true problem: the candy may have been in a box for a week or more
Y'all... candy don't exactly... go bad
The true problem for me: I don't even like candy, though I would give it to my friends...
exactly. so if the box is full of ants by that point, that's a dead giveaway that there's candy in the mystery box. Also, it's full of ants so... there's that.
@@ferna182 1,000 candies and 1M ants, or 1M ants?
I'm fine with that. It's candies! And i really want them.
The paradox stems from a temporal self reference paradox which invalidates strategic dominance. The genie's foresight is impossible, but if taken as a given, it makes picking just B obviously correct
I saw this problem elsewhere and a good portion of my grade in school was debating this question. I am on team both boxes: because if box b was glass, you would take it either way; and it doesn’t matter if it is opaque because of this.
How can we make the right choice when you keep adding new conditions
terms and conditions
Steve Houser WORD DUDE
No, you can make your choice based on either his or custom odds for the exact riddle conditions you want to solve.
I was literally just complaining about this lol
Exactly thank you
Both. Choosing only box B has a possible outcome of $0. Taking both has a minimum outcome of $1000. I'm not gonna deal with a Genie for free.
No? If you choose box b you’ll get the 1mil no matter what. I think you misunderstood this...
@Brayden Dean thats only if it guesses wrong, and in such a game, 0.1% is not worth it so theres not point going with a if you actually had the choice. i see why people pick a though, it's just either 1000$ + 1000000$ every 10th or 0$ + 1000000 every 9/10th.
@@akrobatus3646 that's a theory cuz u don't know anything about *genie*
Buzz Buzz you’re a Bot.
Akrobatus yea and if you get both you still get all the skittles
I think the real solution to this is realizing that when you don't specificy how the predictions work; the math will get confused
I’m seeing this problem as having three different results: loss(choosing box B when it’s empty), small win(choosing both and box B is empty), big win(choosing both and box B has a million dollars). Choosing only box B is the only way to actually lose, so to me it makes sense to choose both as you’re guaranteed a win(even if it might be small, at least you’re not losing).
4th one is choosing box B and B contains 1 million
The only reason there is a question of which to take is because the presenter keeps changing the rule for how the contents of the mystery box are determined. At first, it is implied to just be independent of the player. Then it is change to be a genie that bases the contents off of what he believes the player will pick, which is no longer truly independent. But when the viewer gets pushed towards the idea that it is best to take only the mystery box, the presenter starts pushing that the mystery box was determined long ago. Then out of nowhere the presenter introduces the idea that the genie is only right 90% of the time. If you keep changing the rules to suit your purpose, you can make any problem into "a problem you'll never solve".
I absolutely agree, don't change the rules multiple times during the problem.
Most all paradoxes are flawed arguments in the first place. That's why the're paradoxes. They have someone cheating, mistaken assumptions or just based on bad logic.
phew I thought I was the only one upset about this
I definitely think this video wasn't the best at presenting the problem, but I couldn't agree less with what you're saying.
The viewer isn't "pushed towards" two ideas, that's just the guy showing the possible solutions and explaining them. The 90% thing is just an example of a high probability, showing how the reasoning can go when you think box B is the answer. So this isn't "a problem you'll never solve" because of the way it's presented in the video, it is said it is one because there are two perfectly valid solutions for it.
@@user-dt8mf8nt2v Uuuh. There are not 2 perfectly valid solutions to thee problem.
The problem makes 2 different assumptions and start there.
If you used expected utility for both of those different assumptions, they'd both be correct. Expected utility would output the same answer as the dominance, cause these 2 problems have different starting assumptions.
One would be that 9 out of 10 times the genie is right and the other is it's compleately random.
Sooo... They're independently right. The utility and dominion are distractions, red herrings, a trap to make you not notice what's really going on.
"B only" seems based on trusting the genie can make an accurate prediction while "both" seems based on trusting the genie can't actually predict the future.
Joseph Mitchell It’s stated in the video that the genie would have a 90% success rate so I think it’s obvious that B is a better choice.
Yup, plus the other problem is we don't know how the genie would reward your choice regardless of how accurate the prediction is.
The problem with this is that money's already in the box, it doesn't appear in it depending on what you chose, which makes it hard to not just pick 2, because hey, if there was 1,000,000 in there you'd get it anyways, no matter what option you pick. And this is why that's paradox
@@edwardbutler9840 It is only stated as a part of an argument, not a part of the actual paradox. If we knew the chance of the genie being correct in their prediction, there would be no paradox.
@@edwardbutler9840 you are wrong, he was just giving an example did you watch the video?
I am on the team Expected Utility. I feel like the only reason people choose Strategic Dominance is that they are too arrogant to believe their actions can be predicted with near-perfect accuracy.
im choosing the "rolls dice to determine choice" strategy
I'll just take the Genie.
"This question is actually a lot less simple than it seems... because here are completely game-changing additional parameters I didn't mention before." Eye roll.
Yeah.. also one premise ist basically "We have a magical Genie that can predict your choice" and the only argument for "Both Boxes" is "What if the premise is false?". Not a solid paradox in my opinion
absofuckinglutely
@@gknucklez yeah, in the normal statement of the paradox, the genie figure is NOT omniscient and omnipotent, that makes it a different problem entirely. It's usually presented as a very good fortune teller or machine that has had a lot of success predicting people in the past, so you have reason to believe that it's good at predictions, but not infallible.
@@gknucklez Exactly, you took the words from my mouth(or fingers?)... Dominance principle makes no sense in this case because it completely ignores the premise
We has no magic in real world, so no paradox. Like with time travel paradox - trere is no time traveling in real world.
THE GENIE IS FOOLING US!! that mystery box cant physically contain a million skittles...
but it can contain more candies indeed because we don't know
It might be Nerds. He didn't say it was the same candy as the clear box.
Let’s see if my logic is correct:
A) I don’t understand the problem.
Which means:
B) We’ve obviously been lied to.
Which means:
C) The earth is Flat!
(How’m I doing?)
@@jonnyroxx7172 Nice. I'm totally stealing that.
I just had the same Idea. Time to delete my comment :(
It always comes down to the accuracy of the prediction, if we know how often he is right we can do the math and figure out the best choice (box b method).
If we dont know how often he is right we might as well pick both of them, since he could always be wrong.
The aperant contradiction lies in the question that omited this crucial information to solve the problem. Therefore both explanations are correct given their assumptions and there is no actual contradiction.
The contradiction doesn’t exist but it seems like it does because the question provides two possible problems and you have to solve them both with one answer which isn’t possible thus seeming like a contradiction
The interesting part of this experiment is that... Really, the best option for each individual is their gut instinct. These predictive factors have to be based on who we are as people for them to be remotely accurate... So someone like me, who would take both as a loss aversion strategy, should double down on that decision because the prediction would LIKELY be accurate and screw me over for deviating.
Same is true if you're the gambling type: odds are that you're walking away with a million, with a 10% chance to just get unlucky. Of course if you're the type to get discouraged and take the safe bet of guaranteed 1000 dollars, then the genie would have likely bet on you taking both anyways.
Me: I am choosing box B
Genie: I knew you say that-
Me: So I'll take both
Genie, whispering: what now
box B actually has 1 million bees in it
Giorno Giovanna ME THO! ID DO THAT
I would shake a mystery box : )
Danče
You aren’t allowed to touch it
Actually he would known that you would've picked both boxes in the end so yeah kinda useless.
Did half the people watching this really think the best valued answer would be to choose just the mystery box instead of both before he brought the genie into it?
I'm pretty sure he was basically alluding to the paradox
1% of viewers know Rokko's Basilisk and it's refutations
If the genie is just a metaphor for peoples’ rationalization , I don’t see why people would choose only the mystery box lmao. Choose both every damn time.
@@ElGreenGhost If the Genie has true precognition, he can actually see the future, AND the Genie plays by his own rules, then always take Box B.
If the Genie is not infallible, attempt to calculate how often he's correct, and apply the expected value math.
If you think the Genie is fucking with you, take only box A to fuck with the genie.
Without the genie, that is without an entity that changes the outcome of a box based on your intention, choosing both is obviously the only right answer.
Unless you don't want the clutter of having two boxes.
I think this just comes down to how accurate the genie is. If the problem states almost always right, then b is the way to go.
it's 90%
This problem works better when you say "super computer" rather than Genie. Also if the super computer has just 51% accuracy, just Box B is the simple choice.
You can go even more precise than that. If the super computer has 50.06% accuracy, just Box B is the better choice too.
How is it different if it's a computer rather than a genie?
Wouldn't the computer use the same math that you used to choose this?
This doesn't seem like a paradox to me, it's more like a problem without enough information. It's really just guessing how well can the genie predict your anwser.
"Paradox" is actually a fairly loose term. When most people think of a paradox they are actually only thinking about one type of paradox (something seemingly illogical), but paradox can also be something that comes to a conclusion that is not yet understood. Something like being able to discover "limits" in math without first inventing the calculus that forms our understanding of then. Personally I think these sorts of things should have their own name, or at least always be called by their full names ____ paradox as opposed to a ____ paradox. (Sorry I forgot the actual names)
That's the problem I have with this as presented. It doesn't initially explain that there box B comes with odds of being filled or empty. It doesn't matter if the genie filled it years ago or tries to read your mind on the spot and decides to fill it or not based on your choice and having the exact same odds of reading your mind correctly; the genie is a distraction.
Once odds come into play, it becomes a much simpler proposition: at what odds of box B being filled is it 'better' to take both boxes?
We can then still argue about human nature and whether or not we follow what the math would tell us, but that's another topic entirely.
Instead the problem as presented seems to pit two different scenarios against each other: one in which there's a 50/50 chance of it being full vs empty, and one in which there's a genie with a much better than 50% chance at predicting what you choose. Not the same scenario at all. The actual article goes even further by suggesting that the genie knows that you know that he can predict "and so on", which even further complicates things by saying "I would pick A, but the genie knows I would pick A, so I should pick B, but the genie knows that I know and would know that I would thus pick B, so I should pick A", etc.
All in all, I don't think this was presented very well, or very clearly.
But are we sure he is predicting OUR answer? for all we know he could be having the same dilemma. If anything its completely random its filled because we don't know what counts as a variable to the genie.
Yea, lame af
@@kosherkingofisrael6381 the genie is a god
5:03 who else thought he was going to say popcorn
I actually did
So did I, I don't like candy or popcorn :(
Dyara Baram did u tell a feminist on instagram to stfu because ur profile picture looks familiar lmaoo💀💀
@@papichulo9894 what are you talking about? Your racist, you think all black profile pics look the same too? what about Chinese ones? :P
La VoS es DeuS bro wtf are YOU saying? its a joke bc all these virgins use it like u
Two contingencies here and the conclusion that one who is free to choose should choose both.
Genie right: Practical to assume in the context of this contingency that you were predestined to get $1000 or $1M after his decision w.r.t. the mystery box's content, and the consequence of this predestination is that "reasoning" between 1 option and the other doesn't matter. If you are "tempted" mentally to go against what Mr. Genie predicted, you will somehow end up changing your mind.
Genie wrong: You go against the prediction; in this admittedly less likely (but nonetheless relevant) case, it is clear that what is best is this: going for both boxes after a prediction of your going for just the one box. (The alternative is going for the one and feeling a sense of loss because of the content that was mistakenly omitted from it.)
"Choosing correctly" only is a real issue in the event that it will turn out that the genie will be exposed as fallible, after a choice by you that goes against the prediction. The chance of the genie's being wrong slightly tips the scales of superiority in favor of choosing both boxes:) --- QED.
here my take:
theres a 100 percent chance that if you pick both, you will get one thousand candies or one million plus a thousand candies, ethier way is good so you should pick both. the worst possible outcome if from picking ONLY box b and getting 0. but if you choose both theres a 0 percent chance you will get 0 candies. so yeah pick both
Let me simplify it for you
Which of these would you prefer
1. $1000 and a 10% chance to win a bonus $1000000
2. A 90% chance to get 1000000
@@funny5081 If I only get one choice in my life, the 90% chance for 1,000,000. Like others have said, if the genie is truly omniscient, there is 0 chance to win 1,001,00. So really it's just a choice of 1,000 or 1,000,000; 100% either way. If the genie isn't omniscient, then it comes down to just how accurate the genie is. If, as the problem suggests, it is based on my experience as to how well the genie predicts my future, AND I have CONFIDENCE that the genie is always correct, I assume the genie has proved himself many many times, and in ways that would be nearly, if not impossible were he not omniscient. The 90% was an arbitrary number. If it was 75% would you choose differently? 60%? What if it was 99.99999999%? To me, it really comes down to the actual, specific premise you are starting with. You can be completely logical, but if you start with the wrong premise, you will be wrong.
@@howlinmad03 This problem isn't mathematical or logical because it contains magic. That's why both are good choices.
@@dasik84 Haha Touche.
I'm on team "how accurate does the genie have to be to make the expected value of both choices equal?!"
*leaves to go do the math*
BoredPyro Did you ever figure it out?
@@woodsytheowlscharedcorpse4761 It would be 50.05% for both amount to be equal.
What?
I got 50.3%
Got 50.05% too
I got a number
Answer:
The mystery box is too small to have 1 000 000 candies so it has 0
Very small candy...?
And there is space for 1.000.000$
The box is bigger on the inside. Haven't you ever watched Doctor Who?
Bruh you could just lift it and find out
@@jijinxx If you did that then everything in the universe would wink out of existence except for the mystery box.
Plot twist: Box B contains the same amount of candy, but each piece is broken into 1000 smaller pieces.
well, tbh its not a paradox.
a) the genie prediction is always 90% accurate then u chose only box b.
b) its random what he chooses then u choose both boxes bcs the genie is nothing more than a 50/50 coin.
u just have to
specify the genie in the first place
Choose only Box A and the genie will be so impressed he'll just give you the million.
If box A contains 1,000 candie and uses up what looks like 1/5th or a qauter of the volume, then the mystery box will never be able to contain the 1million candy. So box A is a logical choice to make.
i actually choose box A since the question was : A or B , not A or B or BOTH if taking both is an option, i would take it just because the possibility of maximum profit is possible
@@staberas Well, the question was BOTH or only B
@@ineonfox9245 but A is still an option
@@waffles6280 But the problem doesn't give you that choice. Maybe in real situation it could be a choice but there is no point to choose box A if you can choose both
1,000,000 candies has 1,000 x the volume of 1,000 candies. This won't fit in the mystery box. Therefore the genie is lying. Problem solved
damn you are good
Nobody talked about all the candies being the same size or type. They might be 1 million very small candies
I would totally take 1,000,000 nerds over 1,000 skittles
*Applause*
Same
Since the genie predicts with “near perfect accuracy”, we can assume that the genie predicts correctly more than 50.5% of the time (and likely much more). Since 50.5% is the threshold at which picking box B becomes advantageous, and the genie exceeds that threshold, it makes no sense as to why you wouldn’t pick solely box B.
The alternative argument makes no sense. Yes, what’s there is already there and won’t be altered in the moment due to your choice, but the entire premise is built upon the fact that the genie predicts your choice and fills (or doesn’t fill) the box accordingly. That “solution” completely ignores the condition that the genie actively plays a role in the outcome. It would only make sense under an assumption that the genie has a 50/50 chance of guessing right.
He pretty much made two possible problems and is saying it’s a paradox cause he can’t solve both with a single answer
If the genie used the same math to make his predictions that you used to select your choice, then you're getting nothing.
The real issue here is with the genie. The paradox arises from the issues with multiple agents. It’s somewhat related to the prisoner’s dilemma
Now there are two problems I'll never solve. This and getting Karen to let me see the kids again.
Dad? I thought you went to the store...
hey dad why does the milk you brought in taste bad? i found it near moms bed spilled in the floor.
Wait do does the daughter/son say everything, or does the dad reply?
Your joke is confusing, please learn what punctuation is.
Dad
you solved half of the problem by going MGTOW
r/fuckyoukaren
Seeing him about to eat the candy but then not is the most aggrivating thing.
For me, it was putting it back after touching it. XD
@@iLoveTurtlesHaha That gets me too.
@@iLoveTurtlesHaha thats what got me, they'd be all sticky and gross. Never put skittles back after touching em, especially if they stick to your hands.
that last rhyme at the end made me chuckle!
this whole thing basically boils down to whether you believe the genie or not. the logical dominance solution is basically thinking the genie is bullsht, while expected utility is basically thinking the genie will predict your choice
Me: I studied for this test I’ll be fine. **opens test**
To be continued......
0 questions or 1000000 questions
TheMistery888 X that is a harder decision XD
Well, technically, if this question comes up on a test, you can't be wrong.......or right..........but, also not wrong.
Wait but who says that the genre's accurate's is 90%?
It was stated at the beginning that he predicts with near perfect accuracy. The 90% were just for the maths because you need a specific probability to calculate the outcome, it would work exactly the same with e.g. 70 or 80 or 95%.
@@thevi962 oh
Actually we can not know if the genies accuracy is 90%.
In real life magic isn't proven so there are no real fortune tellers wich means taking both is the best decision wich can be made.
But if I were confronted with this scenaro in real life I wouldn't take any antic sweets because they are probably as hard as stone.
Green Lemon what if it was legit cash?
@@evo683 If it would be actual cash?
Grab everything!
But watch out for temple traps.
it depends totally on wether the genies guess is unchangably accurate or not, if so then you essentially get to decide what litteral reality is in terms of what is inside the box, which is not determined until you open the box since there is no way it could be if the genie will always guess right no matter what
I don't see how this is a paradox if you just understand the definition of omniscient. It isn't a prediction. He KNOWS which one you'll pick. The prediction will always line up with the real outcome under the premise of an omniscient being.
So you ask a question first and then add extra rules after everyone answered?
Kentro xd
yeah he should've brought the grandayy genie in earlier
he's doing this in every video, wtf
It’s like school but you chose to come
That literally every VSauce video ever.
Me : Has lots of work to do.
Also me : Let's watch a problem I can never solve.
I'm literally at my internship rn, staring at an article I'm supposed to read and listening to Kevin xD
Nice little brain teaser there !
Enjoyed this video, thank you Kevin !!!
"one half of you is certain the obvious answer is to take both boxes"
"The other half just as sure to take just the mystery box"
...
No.
I'm sure to not be sure what to take at all xDD
But who decided the genie has a 90% chance of being right? That's the thing that's skewing the results
And since I’m a realist I am also like “wait what there is a genie predicting the results! I was never told about this cause if there is no genie that chooses the boxes value based on his prediction of my choice then why then would I only take box B if there was no genie in the first place?
Ocean Ho I was confused about that at first, since he didn't give us all of the rules before asking us to make the choice. I'm assuming everyone watching chose both boxes before getting the rest of the info
^
If the genie is right more than 50.05% of the time the math works out the same that choosing just B is better.
@@gallantarmor8471 the paradox is the fact that both situations are equally right, not on that percentage of guessing
Those are not even the same problem.
Why is there suddenly an omniscient genie in the problem?
If there's a 50/50 chance of $0 or $1,000,000 then taking both would always be the most beneficial.
Yeah, and when the question os asked there is no indication of what the changes might be. The change there are 1.000.000 candies in box B might be close to 0, why would you *not* take the guaranteed $1000
Yea, and he then goes on about some 90/10 chance, which is just superstition
There is never not an omniscient genie in the problem, Kevin just presented an incomplete version first in a failed attempt to clarify a more complicated question by giving a simplified special case of it.
@@chaossloth2726 So does the genie have excellent prediction of my behavior? Or the entire universe?
Because if he can only predict my rationale, I will let a random event decide my pick. Some quantum behavior or something. 50% chance of me recieving a million candies
The words are only there to philosophize a mathematical paradox. The math still exists and is still paradoxical and still correct no matter the way you choose to solve the problem. The genie and the box are irrelevant and just serve to illustrate the point that both ways of deciding the box are valid and correct while the answer is still different. This is a mathematical paradox not a philosophical one.
One thing I think is interesting is that the expected value calculation is specifically calculated before the boxes are filled. The higher expected value is not in taking only Box B, but in *intending* to only take Box B, such that you're likely predicted to do so. When you get to the actual event of deciding, the expected value is clear; you get X, or 1000 + X, where X is 1,000,000z, for some probability z of Box B having a million. It falls in line with the dominance strategy. The crux of the matter is that, obviously, whatever you do in the present can't affect something that happened in the past.
But I'd only take Box B. Because while what occurs in the present can't change the past, I think it's wrong to conclude that there's no causal relationship. There is one, there's a shared cause. What you decide to do in the future isn't an instantaneous choice. It's a culmination of your thought about the scenario, the strategy you adopted, the desires you've had, all of your thinking and existing since becoming aware of the scenario, even more broadly just a consequence of you being you and then eventually finding yourself in that scenario. If the genie or AI or what have you predicts your actions by acquainting itself with you, your personality and thoughts, in some magical way, and then predicts your future decision through simulation... Well then, whatever intention you have will affect the outcome. But whatever intention you have will also affect your decision; that's, y'know, how intentions work. What we were intending to do affects what we actually do, in the event.
Of course, it is possible to act differently than how you previously intended. Intentions have an influence, but they aren't the only influence. So the question becomes, do you think you can honestly intend to take only box B, and then after a point change your mind, in a way where this change of mind isn't predictable? I don't think I could. I think my decisions are culminations of longer processes which are (hypothetically) predictable, and if I planned to change my intentions that would obviously contradict that I had those intentions. So, I'd honestly intend to take only Box B. And in the event, I think I'd take only Box B, because that's what I'd do if I was really intending it, not just thinking I'd intend it.
So, even though obviously the contents of the boxes are already set by the time I actually take one or both, and I'd be better off taking both, I've already committed to my decision process to take one. If I take both, it means I didn't actually have a decision process to take both to begin with.
With that said, with a 90% accuracy rate I might take the certain $1,000 and chance for a failed prediction with $1,001,000, rather than a 90% chance for $1,000,000 but one in ten chance I get nothing, but that's like, a risk aversion thing. Which is also cool but not so much something to be philosophically pretentious about in a comments section.
If the genie is 100% correct, you can choose both and get an extra cool looking box.
4:41 "What exactly is going on here?"
Schroedinger's candy... no, wait.
Was literally looking for comment like this 😹
There's no candy in this box! There's just a dead cat!
@@saifuusuri No! That cat is alive too
@@Pupqet You're right!
PositivePlastic9 it’s also dead
of course it has 0 candies in it the box isnt big enough
What if it is small candies, like Nerds?
@@ShadowEclipex then they are no better than the 1000
@@Verrisin Yeah. I would take a guarantee over a gamble any time.
Could probably fit 1 million sprinkles in that box.
@@kylejacobs1247 I don't like sprinkles!
You were right in that one video the more you think about something the more it gets harder to choose
Setting up an equation:
10⁶X = 10³ + 10⁶(1 - X)
where X is the probability of the genie being correct we get that the genie has to have an accuracy greater than 50,05% for it to be worth choosing only box B.
If you do not beleive in genies then you should assume that he will be correct 50% of the time and therefore choose both boxes.
In contrast, if you do beleive in the genie, i think it would be fair to assume that he has a greater accuracy than 50,05% and therefore, if you beleive in him then you should pick only box B.
This problem is flawed.
Normally without the genie, picking box a and box b is the clear logical answer. However, factoring in that the genie has already predicted what you will choose *with near perfect accuracy*, taking only box b is the correct choice. The two answers that "contradict" each other are really just answering two different questions.
ye i really dont get the point. im too lazy to watch the whole video but when he suddenly come up genie i lost it. whats the point of it
How is near perfect accuracy a logical contradiction? Is it really inconceivable that genie cannot predict your choice?
@@ExplosiveBrohoof When you add the genie, only option B makes sense, but without the genie changing the option, option A + B is the best. They are different because with each method, the hypothesis is changed
you are 100% correct i will choose both boxes and hope to get small prize and large prize if i dont get large prize its okay i still got small prize. i dont want to leave with nothing.
that's exactly what I was thinking
Hmmm, Box A or Box B?
Take the genie
Vinicius Dias you need consent.
Hell ya
its box a + b or only b bruv. dont r/whoosh me pls
@@user-ct1tg6cv3p
r/itswooooshwith4os
Can the genie predict you are going to take him?
As the person sitting in front of the boxes ready to make my choice am I aware that a robot/genie/whatever has made a prediction with 90% accuracy of my choice?
The trick is to be confident you will pick just B. Then pick both
The expected utility is only this high because they set the genie's accuracy to 90%. If it was 50%, both boxes would be the best choice.
True although then he wouldn’t be omniscient at all, just guessing randomly
Both is already the correct answer anyway.
The genie already predicted what you will pick, it doesn’t actually affect what you pick.
That would be like saying somebody good at predicting the outcome of football games actually affects how well the team they better for plays.
@@brandonbombplays9304 if they are omniscient it literally means they are all knowing. They have seen the future and know what you end up choosing no matter what
@@brandonbombplays9304 you arent very clever are you
@@pixel3936 yeah but they already chose which means that choosing both is literally 1000 free dollars.
Genie's don't exist, always pick both. How's that for some simple math
Oh my science! Thank you! This is an idiotic problem. I was yelling at the video while I was watching!
Yeah, is there something I'm missing? Why are we assuming magic is real?
I’m struggling to wrap my head around why you would only choose B. I know that the math is showing that the genie is right but the genie is fake. If you take box A away then box b is 50% chance to have it or not to. If you choose both boxes, you get $1000 but also get the 50 50 chance. Whether you choose box B or both, box B will always be a 50 50 chance. Think about it this way, you have the opportunity to get $1000 and get a free lottery ticket or you can just take the ticket. Your chances of winning do not go down or up if you take the free $1000 therefore the obvious answer is to take both boxes. If you disagree please reply because this is driving me nuts on why you would only pick B.
@@andrewbaumert9676 i agree
*genies
I’d only choose box A I don’t need that many candies
The genie always knew which box you would choose.
Plot twist, you cant fit 1 million candies in box B
Ben Bohl depends on the type of candy
@@blakemontgomery6599 sprinkles maybe?
He was joking lol
Exactly what I thought
do sprinkles count as candy? If I were to hand you a sprinkle, could I say that I gave you candy?
I took only Box B and it contained Schrödinger's cat.
But was it alive or dead?
Zachariah M. Baird both
Zombie cat
send pic
it was a pickle
My question is how does this genie know what my choice is before I make it? I like the math behind the expected utility but that’s assuming that the genie is right 90 percent of the time. How do we know that’s true?
There are two pretty big assumptions:
- your choice doesn't influence what's in the mystery box
- the genie is correct with 90% probability, regardless of what you choose
Those two assumptions are, pretty clearly, contradictory. They can't both be true at the same time.
If the first assumption is correct, it's better to choose both boxes. If the second is correct, it's better to chose the mystery box. In both cases you can solve the problem with EV and you'll get the correct answer. In the first case, you can also use strategic dominance.
i get bored
i open youtube
Kevin gives me an existential crisis
no longer bored
i exit youtube
The moment you said "genie" my D&D instincts kicked in and said neither box run
PTSD
XD
the question really comes down to, do you trust the "genie" to actually be clairvoyant. If you do, then pick Box B, If you don't believe the genie has the ability to know the future, then pick both. In this strictly hypothetical situation, i'll assume the Genie, being a super natural being that exists in this situation, is in fact omniscient and i would pick only Box B. If this was some guy on the street claiming to be a genie in real life, i'd pick both.
Exactly. He made up the 90% prediction rate, but if he had a 100% prediction rate, then I’d pick box B. If he had a 50% prediction rate, I’d pick both boxes. That’s literally all this problem boils down to. But seeing how this guy is a genie, I’m sure he has a 100% pick rate.
Exactly my thoughts, his conclusion at the end that this has no right answer is wrong. It's completely dependent on the genies ability to predict the future, define the question clearly and the answer is revealed. Disliked video for being dumb.
If the Genie can be wrong, both boxes is clearly the correct answer. The contents of the box is already set in stone. Your decision has no influence on what will be in it. So if you open both and it turns out to be none, that doesn't mean making the other choice would have been better, because your choice doesn't have any power over what's in the box anymore.
This is what I was thinking. The money's already in the box, so in the real world, it's always better to change both boxes. But if the genie is truly clairvoyant, then picking both boxes would retroactively cause the genie to change its prediction, so you should go with the expected utility.
Technically, wouldn’t the candies/no candy be in a state of super position until you check?
Kevin: Simple right?
Me: Wrong
Kevin: Right
Me: Wtf
Kevin: wrong
Me: huh
Kevin: maybe
Me: do u know the answer?
Kevin: I honestly don't know
Me: ok then
0:18 I’ll take both because the mystery box definetely can’t fit a million candies so it has 0, so really might as well take a 1000
I'm taking both boxes literally every time
Then you'll average 101 000 instead of 900 000, per go.
Sssh, don't let the genie hear you. The trick is to announce you'll take only B, for sure, and then change it up and go for both at the last second.
@@Bobstew68 You'd really take a huge risk of losing 1 000 000 to gain an extra 1 000. That isn't sane. What makes you think the genie would be tricked by such an obvious ploy?
@@Chris_5318 dude. There just isn't enough info. Idk what the genie knows or his likelihood of guessing correctly OR when he fills it. So tbh I'm taking both because if this is our universe I don't believe in this whole mind reading thing so it makes sense to me to take both.
@@jamiegormley5922 I find it strange you accept only certain parts of proposed riddle and ignore other. And you WERE informed about likelyhood of genie guessing correctly.
"Right"
"Wrong!"
"Maybe?"
"Honestly. I don't know"
can you repeat the question?
Who does man
Kevin: "blah blah blah among us blah blah blah... right?"
Me: "Oh boy, here we go again"
At 1:30 the problem states that the genie can predict what we'll choose with near-perfect accuracy. It's easy to forget this by the end of the video. This changes the question from, "which strategy should I use if the genie can be right or wrong?" to "what strategy should I use if I assume the genie is right?" I wouldn't say 90% is near perfect; let's up it to 99.99%. If the genie is essentially always correct, there's no point in trying to outsmart it by declaring that the genie has already made his choice and so you should collect the extra 1,000, because that would have already been part of the genie's prediction. Essentially, the genie can go back in time.
The answer is flip a coin before your brain explodes
MrAMP1520 lol
in that case, you get $101,000.
But then how does the genie have a 90% chance to predict a 50/50 coin flip?
A problem I can never solve? Why Micheal never uploads
Ancient Accounts - Animated History too busy with yt red
Because he's busy doing CZcams originals. He's got his own show called Mind Field. There, I solved it.
@@Joshiesgotagun but he said hes been working on a new video for like 10 months now. surely he knows not everyone can afford yt red?
he is busy filming himself watching a pot boil for 1 hour
He uploads on dong
This math problem is pretty cool and accurate, but I do see one supposed flaw (i might be wrong): you can’t know the accuracy of the genie, making it to where depending on the percentage you choose, you choose the reasoning in the expected utility calculation and therefore change which choice is actually better. I am just a kid who is trying to comorehend this problem, so if anyone sees any flaw in my reasoning please point it out :)
The problem with this question is that it cannot be predicted what I will choose. So in that case the options are either just box B or box B + 1000, which is an obvious choice, as box B + 1000 is obviously more. The Genie however, can predict the future, therefore if you choose to take both boxes he will HAVE to have predicted that and put 0 candies in box B. Yet again if you choose only box B, the Genie will HAVE to have predicted that as well and put 0 candies in box B. Regardless of what you think, you can only have one final answer, which, in this case, is the same as repeating an answer. It is like you have already told the Genie what you will choose and no matter what happens you cannot change the answer this time around. Since the Genie already knows your answer he will have either put 0 or a million candies in box B, depending on your answer. From that, you know, taht if you choose both boxes, there will be no candies in box B whatsoever. And if you choose only box B, there will be a million candies in the box. The answer to this question has already been provided to you and you just have to think logically.
it can be predicted because he sees the future
You say the guy has already decided what's in the box so it makes zero sense to me to not choose both.
genie predicts with 90% accuracy. if you pick box B its a 90% chance he predicted that and put in $1000000 and 10% he put in nothing. if you pick both boxes its a 90% chance he predicted that and put in nothing and 10% chance he put in $1000000.
@@adasdasdasdasd9116 There can't be a 90% he predicted each outcome. That's 180%.
You say that... but you said it in public.
Now if you're actually faced with the problem, the mystery box will be empty. If you'd advocated one-boxing, he'd give you a million dollars.
video is misleading. The genie's 90% prediction is a different problem than the original stated problem. He's comparing apples to oranges.
@@Xiler6969 thats what i was thinking if the genie is 90% right obviously you'd pick b and have a 90% chance to get the 1mil thought he might of given false information
Seems obvious to me:
Box B if it's a Genie. Both boxes if it's a person
it's just a question of how reliable the "prediction" is, really.
If the person doing the prediction is a normal person, that's a 50% chance of them getting it right. The expected payoff will be higher if you take both than if you take box B
The two options are equal if the predictions are 50.001% accurate. Any higher than that and box B is better, any lower than that and box A is better.
Depends on if the person doing the prediction knows the way you think. If they can predict your strategy based on what they know about you, it's far better than 50%. If you posted your choice on the comments to this video, the person has some really good information.
@@codahighland in maths it's pretty hard to quantify how much somebody knows about somebody else. Therefore we use 50% as in reality this is the mean around which the normal bell curve is placed. This is dealing with extraneous variables, thus giving better scientific data.
In other words, if we did this prediction thing a billion times, the mean would be 50% predict correctly.
@@CamMackay96 It's not hard to quantify. If you were using the same two people in all of those trials, and if you could ensure those trials were all independent of each other (among other things, this is going to include testing varying values of a and b so that you're not just testing exactly the same scenario every time), then by the end of those trials you will have measured a bias, which is indeed a relatively robust way to quantify that.
Now, if you assume that the predictor knows nothing about the subject, then 50% is a reasonable prior probability. My point is that you can adjust those prior probabilities based on information the predictor possesses about the subject.
Regardless, it's beside the point. The point is that it IS possible to have probabilities besides 50% even if the predictor is human.
"The boat's a boat, but the mystery box could be anything! It could even be a boat!" -Peter Griffin