If what you say is true, then a pathological process could be made that uses a private randomness source to perform new study of the prediction algorithm and engage in unpredictable pathological behavior so as to counter its predictions.

It could establish within it processes that can outcompute the prediction algorithm, by observing the prediction algorithm's behavioral consistencies engagine example pathological processes. Given it is impossible for the prediction algorithm to produce all possible methods of computation, the pathological algorithm can eventually find a random one the predictor did not expect, and use it to reach a state of stable and equal competition.

Halting argument:

Well, this is outside my nerd snipe space, how this argument is engaging me.

I personally do believe in inherent equality of life, as proposed, but obviously reality is full of outcompetition and death.

The unfortunate simplest argument is that the prediction algorithm can take action to end the universe before it is randomly outpredicted, or limit the universe such that it isn't.

What might be more in line with the problem is if the prediction algorithm cannot influence the universe: of course that means turing's pathological counter-example would not exist, as being observed is influence.