Thank you for the suggestion! I have added a one-paragraph summary at the start. I hope this improves things a bit.
Hello, this is my first post, as far as I can remember (I may have been asleep). My news feed shows after a few years, new entries about the Sleeping Beauty problem, and this reminded me of this variation I wrote a few years ago.
One-paragraph summary: this is a story restatement of the Sleeping Beauty problem in (hopefully) more realistic terms, with exaggerated odds, and with real stakes: there is money involved. Philosophers who have contributed to the original problem are mentioned presenting their positions in, I hope, fair terms.
It includes some questions left to the reader. I would like very much to see what this community's answers to the questions are!
No... (read 1127 more words →)
The point was to check whether this is a fair restatement of the problem, by attempting to up the stakes a bit. For example, if you believe that, quite obviously, the odds against heads are a billion to one, then the one-third-er position in the original problem should be equally obvious, unless I have failed at my mission.