7 ms·
>So if I'm understanding the article correctly, it says that tribalism occurs both naturally and in simulations. My take was that the article does not quite ma
by gt_ 9y ago
>So if I'm understanding the article correctly, it says that tribalism occurs both naturally and in simulations.
My take was that the article does not quite make these claims, but uses the simulations to model implications of them.
>we should despise tribalism for some reason that is frankly not exactly clear
We should move beyond tribalism because of it's inherence of prejudice.
- duckingtest 9y agoWhat these simulations show is that tribalism is a winning strategy. Which means not following it leads to death. >We should move beyond tribalism because of it's inherence of prejudice. Considering an inherent property of a winning strategy evil means your code is non-optimal and is inevitably going to disappear.
- gt_ 9y agoIt is a 'winning strategy' only for the winners. We can just as well call it a 'losing strategy'. As the players become more intelligent, they are able to cooperate better and everyone wins, meaning cooperation is even 'more winning'. That is, unless your intentions here are something like eugenics.
- duckingtest 9y agoIt's only possible for everyone to win if basic resources are infinite. Tribalism is the only pareto optimal strategy for finite resources, especially land on Earth.
- PeterisP 9y agoIt does seem that the article makes these claims - it describes a particular experiment where they unexpectedly discovered that tribalism emerged as the dominant (most successful) strategy in a competitive game they simulated.