3 ms·
I find these sorts of theories by US economists (that game theory is how humans think, all humans are lonely, distrustful, little 'value' hoarders) little more
by confounded 8y ago
I find these sorts of theories by US economists (that game theory is how humans think, all humans are lonely, distrustful, little 'value' hoarders) little more than telling introspections. They're approximately as scientific as evolutionary psychology.
In the context of privacy, how would 1, 2 or 3 explain the FSF, the EFF, or Wikipedia?
Does the selection explain things better than people wanting them to exist because they inherently believe that public goods are good, and they want to make a better world for everyone? (Even if such a belief is 'irrational' and thus game-theoretically impossible.)
- jccooper 8y agoThey do not need to be explained under the parent's rubric, because that's describing the provision of public goods by large organizations. FSF, EFF, and Wikipedia are small organizations and operate differently. Which the linked book covers. Even in its precis, had you bothered to click through.