So there's still a version of time-slice FDT which one-boxes in non-transparent newcomb because it calculates the effect of its actions using subjunctive dependence
But it disagrees with UDT in counterfactual mugging because only timeslice FDT 0-agent cares about timeslice FDT 1-agent in both branches, timeslice FDT 1-agent who sees tail doesn't care about the other branch
& it disagrees with UDT & TDT on transparent newcomb because the certainty of the box's contents "supersedes" subjunctive dependence
Is this accurate & is there an existing term for timeslice FDT?
So there's still a version of time-slice FDT which one-boxes in non-transparent newcomb because it calculates the effect of its actions using subjunctive dependence
But it disagrees with UDT in counterfactual mugging because only timeslice FDT 0-agent cares about timeslice FDT 1-agent in both branches, timeslice FDT 1-agent who sees tail doesn't care about the other branch
& it disagrees with UDT & TDT on transparent newcomb because the certainty of the box's contents "supersedes" subjunctive dependence
Is this accurate & is there an existing term for timeslice FDT?
I'm not sufficiently familiar with how FDT or "subjunctive dependence" are defined to say, but as far as I can tell that seems right. I think the closest analogue is this post's definition of TDT: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/dmjvJwCjXWE2jFbRN/fdt-is-not-directly-comparable-to-cdt-and-edt. Because TDT conditions on its observations