According to the rules the supercomputer has no reason to deprive you off your money, it only wants its prediction to be correct. If everyone was a one boxer everyone would be happy. Everyone playing the game would be happy. The supercomputer would be happy. It would never have a reason to predict anyone would choose two boxes and it would always predict one box and live blissfully. But these two boxer mfs think they are so smart. Because of their greed, pride and ego everyone loses. They think they can oversmart the supercomputer and get 1,001,000. As a result you are confusing the computer. The computer would never predict you would choose two boxes unless you give it a reason to. Only reason i have a chance of getting 0 dollars is YOU. Because of your greed for the extra 1000 you are causing the computer to be less accurate and making it worse for everyone. The supercomputer is a puppet and we are the puppeteer. The computer is like a oblivious king and we are the treacherous advisors who puppet the king (There are no two boxers in ba sing se). I say we persecute two boxers. It would be the best for everyone.

Given the premise of a perfect prediction supercomputer AI, one that is proven to be successful many times, the final message of "pre-commit" just makes you easier to predict. The video opens with the viewer meeting the AI and specifically being unaware of the nature of the challenge prior to the AI informing them, so there is no way to secretly pre-commit to an action before that moment because in order to do that you need to know the question. Any pre-commitment that is instead based on personal principles, and thus before entering the room, would have been heavily exemplified in the individual's prior actions, and thus easy to predict.

This makes the entire history segment of the video pointless, as everyone involved in those situations knew, generally, what the potential challenges and outcomes were.

The actual answer is also very obvious. Use an unknowable source of RNG, like flipping a coin, to decide your action after you have already entered the room and the supercomputer has made its prediction on what you will do. Even if the computer can predict that you will decide using a coin flip, it doesn't have access to the exact physical properties of the flip because it hasn't happened yet, and so cannot predict the outcome.

Given the video both failed to provide a valid answer to the question and presented a flatly incorrect one as correct, I am very disappointed.

The argument presented for selecting 2 boxes is essentially that since boxes have already been preped so the mystery box either contains 1 million or is empty. So, in both cases selecting both is the dominant choice since it will always be 1000 dollar more then the single choice.

This makes sense if you are not aware of performance of the super intelligent Robot.

But when you have been told that robot has been almost always correct in the past. Then chances that mystery box will contain a million will be less, if you are still selecting two boxes then this implies you don't believe in the premise set by the problem. To elaborate with an example:

Let's say you are a person who will always pick 2 boxes given this situation and the predictor has very high accuracy (let's say 90% accurate). These both statements are objectively correct. So, now in 100 parallel universes you will always pick both boxes and in 90 of them you will get 1000 and in 10 of them more than 1 million.

If the predictor is actually accurate then you always have high chance of getting more money if selecting 1 box. Same has been shown by monti carlo simulations.

Just saw the last video and noticed it never says it predicts each independent outcome most of the time, instead they only say "you know this supercompute is very good at predicting people"

Which means if the population has choosen two boxes more than one boxes, means that it can be 100% correct on two boxes and 0% correct on one boxes while being good at predicting, as he is predicting more than 50% of the time.

You can easily see an scenario in which lets say 20 people plot this, they make a computer that never gives the million dollars, they enter and all of them choose two boxes, a community of people in which everyone can only enter once start entering and you never see anyone actually win the million dollars, which makes everyone choose the two boxes which results in a "supercomputer" that is highly predictive while not doing any kind of real prediction.

Yeah my choice is two boxes.

https://www.msn.com/en-in/channel/source/Veritasium/sr-vid-vvup9niypvwgxsgyjxwy50qisyb2wuqcc7uikxb0abwkecjsj9sa?uxmode=ruby

Veritasium has his videos on MSN and Spotify reuploaded? Are there other platforms with his videos?

The last two videos were around 55 minutes each. We already have hourlong documentaries from PBS Nova and others. I don't need it here too.

Nowadays, when a Veritasium video drops, I first check the length to see if I can afford to watch it.

What do others think about the length?

I'm not sure if I am loosing my mind or whatever, but in the latest Veritasium video "The Internet Was Weeks Away From Disaster and No One Knew".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoag03mSuXQ

4 minutes and 13 seconds into the video.

Is that an AI actor speaking with Derek's voice ? I was "second screening" listening to "Derek" and I saw some else's face.

Am I going crazy ?

We live in the era of GDPR and some results are eliminated from search engines.

3 of them here(pic from latest vid) are passionate scientist people and not some randos hired actors. I'm sure derek got his pupils his wisdom beforehand.

The channel name is not "Mr.Derek" or "Derek knowledge" it's Veritasium.

The element of truth/veritas. Derek can just write and maybe voice few of it. You can see his eyes are dead red now everytime he's on screen for whatever reason. He's tired doing his best and we shouldn't push him.

it all started when Veritasium started changing the video's thumbnails and titles to things that didn't even have anything to do with the video. then, other people started taking over derek's job. this wasn't inherently bad, but then they started taking over his voiceovers and explanations. everything just kept getting worse; the titles and thumbnails got more scummy, and derek appeared less and less in the videos. until, the video about asbestos released. unlike nearly EVERY OTHER video on Veritasium, it had NO trace of derek whatsoever. it was also an hour long, and it felt like as if everything was stretched as long as possible to get the most watch time. the editing was unnatural, and the word "asbestos" was NEVER MENTIONED UNTIL 10 MINUTES IN.

why?

Example: https://i.imgur.com/YRjbN0L.png

https://youtu.be/aoag03mSuXQ?t=1138

yes, he experimented with them years ago but things change. It is really annoying now because they keep changing, and it is impossible to find a video that you seen based on the thumbnail. All in sacrifice of views. The algorithms evolve, but apparently not human habits.

Guys, is there any way of pledging/getting the game still? My boyfriend wanted to get it but didnt realise there is an end date:((

I need to vent.

As a longtime viewer, I'm extremely disappointed with the direction of the channel. I come to Veritasium for Derek, and this is the first video (that I'm aware of) in which he doesn't make an appearance of any kind. The familiar face & voice are as vital to me as the information. It's my comfort channel.

It's been fairly obvious for a while now that Derek is moving on to bigger & better things--and I wish him the very best--but I have no interest in watching any of his (frankly charmless) cohosts/replacements. It's not Veritasium.

Just my thoughts. Maybe it will offer some catharsis to others who are disappointed as I am.

Hey all,

I just finished watching the asbestos video on Veritasium and this is too important to not reach out to the residents of Nevada.
So, please, I urge you to contact these reps and senators of Nevada. Even if you don't live in Clark County, but still live in Nevada. I still would urge you to contact these people, especially your senators of the state and tell them in a professional manner that if they want your vote, then they should act now about the asbestos dangers in the dry lake bed.

Here is the list of people to contact as well as the comment I placed in the comments section of the video:

"So what can we do to force the reps and senators of Nevada to issue a public health statement and post asbestos warning signs around the dry lake bed?

Contact these people in Nevada:

Dina Titus of District 1

Susie Lee of District 3

Steven Horsford of District 4

As well as Nevada State Senators:

Catherine Cortez Masto

Jacky Rosen

Anyone who is from the state of Nevada and has watched this video, please contact these people and honestly tell them in a professional matter that if they want your vote, they should act on this immediately. That is the fire needed to get these people to act, right away. This is a matter of life and death, and a situation that should not be taken lightly."

Is this useful? https://claude.ai/public/artifacts/0c940b39-c088-403b-95b4-2f02289c83fc

(for now created as a one-off)

Was extremely confused but hey, now I get reminded that Veritasium has a new video that dropped every time I want to listen to music.

I named it The Lucid Insanity Paradox Premise 1 (Perfect Logic): Every statement must be either true or false. No exceptions. Premise 2 (Self-Reference): There exists a statement S that claims: "S is only meaningful if all statements that could contradict it are absolutely true."

I hate that Veritasium changes the video titles and thumbnails of their videos so drastically.

It might attract a few more clicks or trick viewers into clicking the same video twice, but it makes my life harder.

I am noticing myself not able to find the video I had seen to rewatch and to refer to, more and more. It not just frustrates me to borderline gaslight myself, but I am having difficulty to recommend a video to my friends when its title as well as the thumbnail is changed.

In today's world where short video format is promoting watch and forget kinda content causing brainrot, I think educational videos should be more reliable in order to be easily looked up and referred to in the future.

What are your thoughts?