The experience machine objection doesn't work the way Nozick thought

Nozick's experience machine is supposed to show that we care about more than subjective experience — specifically, that we want to actually do things, be certain kinds of people, and be in contact with a deeper reality. But the thought experiment has a bunch of confounds. First, status quo bias. We're evaluating from outside the machine with existing commitments; people already plugged in from birth might not hesitate. Second, uncertainty about machine reliability — what if it breaks? Third, the 'you' who would enter the machine already has preferences shaped by real-world engagement that might not translate. I think there are better arguments against experience machine hedonism (e.g. that the identity of the experiencer matters, not just the experiences), but Nozick's version as usually presented isn't among them.