Game Theory

[huamulan]

Assuming that two people who are forced to share will be just as happy with the outcome as two people who choose to share.

[Army of GOD]

I'd share since we get to talk to each other. Chances are much better to cooperate--even with a minute or so of conversation before the game.


@rds, this is the prisoner's dilemma, just worded differently.

I know, which is why I said it was another example of the Prisoner's Dilemma.

-rd

And like I said, this is different than the Prisoner's Dilemma.

That would make me more likely to share. I feel like at a certain point, the value of the money is negligibly large. If we were fighting for 100 dollars, then fine, I'll steal. 30 million? I'll share. I'd be plenty happy with 15 mil.

Sure, you'd be happy to share, but who says that your competitor will be? If you convince him that you're going to say 'share' then he knows he can rip you off.

Judging by the votes cast so far, half of the people in this thread are going to be taken advantage of by the other half.

That's why I said it depends on how well I know/can trust the other person.

[/]

Well, the op insinuates the two of you already crushed a whole bunch of other people throughout the competition, just to get to the point with the money, so utilitarianism is hardly relevant...

Finding them afterwards is not an option, so whatever you walk away from the competition with is your final winnings. And you have never met this person before.

Would it influence your decision if I tell you that the bag of money contains $30,000,000?

So, does this assumes I haven't even seen my opponent during competition? Because fair play and good sportsmanship says a lot.
And I am not allowed to write them a check even if I never see them again?
I honestly would want them to have half in my original answer, even if I would resort to threats of mutually assured destruction.
If they weren't aware we couldn't share, I would use the same threat as before to cajole them into voting share, but would actually vote share instead.
if they were aware, I suppose it's down to reading their actions then, if they seem the honest sort and offer to shake on it, I'll share.
If they give some BS that sounds like they are manipulating me about needing the money to feed the poor or something, I'd panic and steal, I can donate to charity myself.

[whitestazn88]

even if you talk to the person, you know they're thinking the same as you "if I convince them to share enough, then I'll get to steal and then I'll have all the moneyz". thus, I would steal no matter what, every time, because I'm not a sucker. and i'd rather "cut off my nose to spite my face" (if that saying applies correctly)

[Haggis_McMutton]

prisoner's dilemma is pretty standard stuff.

iterated prisoner's dilemma is where it's at.

inb4

IT'S NOT PRISONER'S DILEMMA

[BigBallinStalin]

Id share.

Yes its the lesser rational option.

Id still share knowing that its irrational.

Why?

Because if you cloned my decision and rolled it out all accross humanity then you get everyone being moderately happy, compared to somewhere between 0% and 50% being very happy and somewhere between 50% and 100% being unhappy.

This is indirectly a collective cultural decision and for all collective decisions you should not be looking at the individual metric but the collective (inb4 BBS: dont worry, I already understand that in many cases the pursuit of the individual benefit leads to the greatest collective benefit; but in this specific example it does not).

Think about it: repeat this dilimma for the population of the world, two people at a time. Say you have two scenarios: Complete individual freedom vs Some authority telling you that you must vote "share".

Complete freedom metrics: (unhappy = 0, happy = 1, very happy =2)
Average population happiness: Less than or equal to 1 (it can never be greater than 1 and is likely to be less depending on the population)
Lower quartile happiness: Likely to be 0 depending on population

Enforced share metrics: (unhappy = 0, happy = 1, very happy =2)
Average population happiness: 1
Lower quartile happiness: 1

This is a single game. I think the term is single-shot....

That means that there's no repeat games. People are incapable of learning from their mistakes. The future of this game has been eliminated, so it bears no resemblance to reality. For example, if TGD convinces someone to vote "share," and TGD votes "steal," there's a good chance that the other player might pay TGD his respects after the game.

What's missing from the game is the process of trial-and-error, of repeated games. This type of game can't be accurately used as a metaphor for "market v. government" or "individual freedom v. government coercion."

So, all I'm saying is, don't take this game too seriously.


On Rationality:
It's completely rational to vote "share" given your expectation of the other player's choice--however that may have formed. There's also opportunity cost. How would you feel if you voted Steal? I'd imagine you'd feel very shitty (as would I); you'd be foregoing the value of voting Share. One's opportunity cost is subjectively determined, known only to the decision-maker, and only at the time of the decision being made.

In the case of opportunity cost, your decision to avoid a greater loss (thus lesser profit) is certainly rational.

[BigBallinStalin]

even if you talk to the person, you know they're thinking the same as you "if I convince them to share enough, then I'll get to steal and then I'll have all the moneyz". thus, I would steal no matter what, every time, because I'm not a sucker. and i'd rather "cut off my nose to spite my face" (if that saying applies correctly)

You'd suspect that, as have I, but if people are allowed to talk to each other--even for a minute or two before the game--you'd be surprised by the results. A small conversation can really increase someone's chances of voting for cooperation.

Of course, when you haven't met the person, IIRC the percentage who voted "Steal" (or "defect" in the PD game) was roughly 70%.

Sauce? at home, sorry

[BigBallinStalin]

prisoner's dilemma is pretty standard stuff.

iterated prisoner's dilemma is where it's at.

inb4

IT'S NOT PRISONER'S DILEMMA

I'd have a prisoner's dilemma all over your mom, if you'd let me.

[Army of GOD]

prisoner's dilemma is pretty standard stuff.

iterated prisoner's dilemma is where it's at.

inb4

IT'S NOT PRISONER'S DILEMMA

Jesus fucking Christ you half-brained ignorance rapist. ITS NOT A PRISONERS DILEMMA

[whitestazn88]

Sauce? at home, sorry

WUT? WAT? BATTMAN?

[john9blue]

Jesus fucking Christ you half-brained ignorance rapist. ITS NOT A PRISONERS DILEMMA

he... rapes ignorance?

with what? logic? facts?

[BigBallinStalin]

Sauce? at home, sorry

WUT? WAT? BATTMAN?

post in two weeks in that thread I created, that "remind BBS to do X" thread.

[Army of GOD]

Jesus fucking Christ you half-brained ignorance rapist. ITS NOT A PRISONERS DILEMMA

he... rapes ignorance?

with what? logic? facts?

No, he rapes ignorance because he's attracted to it.

It's sort of a weird metaphor, but WHAT DA f*ck EVA. I DO WHAT I WANT. IM FIFDEEN YEAS OLL.

[Lootifer]

Hows did the rugby season finish up? (or is it still going? I assume you guys play it in winter like the rest of the world so itd be finishing/finished up by now)

[Army of GOD]

HOW IS THAT RELEVANT AT ALL

[BigBallinStalin]

ANSWER THE GOD DAMN QUESTION, AOG.

[Army of GOD]

oh well. anyway it's done now. My team didn't really play much because it's the shitty D3 team but the D1 team went to the NCAA basketball equivalent of the elite eight and then got wrecked by Dartmouth.

[Lootifer]

ANSWER THE GOD DAMN QUESTION, AOG.

THIS

[rdsrds2120]

ANSWER THE GOD DAMN QUESTION, AOG.

THIS

HE ALREADY DID, I MEAN,

CHRIST.

[Lootifer]

herpity derpity

[thegreekdog]

oh well. anyway it's done now. My team didn't really play much because it's the shitty D3 team but the D1 team went to the NCAA basketball equivalent of the elite eight and then got wrecked by Dartmouth.

Fucking Dartmouth rugby. I got into a fight with their prop back in 1999. Huge Hawaiin bastard... he nearly broke my nose.

[BigBallinStalin]

oh well. anyway it's done now. My team didn't really play much because it's the shitty D3 team but the D1 team went to the NCAA basketball equivalent of the elite eight and then got wrecked by Dartmouth.

Fucking Dartmouth rugby. I got into a fight with their prop back in 1999. Huge Hawaiin bastard... he nearly broke my nose.

THIS IS NOT A PRISONER'S DILEMMA, TGD.

[rdsrds2120]

oh well. anyway it's done now. My team didn't really play much because it's the shitty D3 team but the D1 team went to the NCAA basketball equivalent of the elite eight and then got wrecked by Dartmouth.

Fucking Dartmouth rugby. I got into a fight with their prop back in 1999. Huge Hawaiin bastard... he nearly broke my nose.

THIS IS NOT A PRISONER'S DILEMMA, TGD.

But did your team win or lose?

-rd

[thegreekdog]

oh well. anyway it's done now. My team didn't really play much because it's the shitty D3 team but the D1 team went to the NCAA basketball equivalent of the elite eight and then got wrecked by Dartmouth.

Fucking Dartmouth rugby. I got into a fight with their prop back in 1999. Huge Hawaiin bastard... he nearly broke my nose.

THIS IS NOT A PRISONER'S DILEMMA, TGD.

But did your team win or lose?

-rd

Lost. Big.