4 ms·

In the game of Prisoner's Dilemma, if the game is played for only one round, the optimal move is for both players to betray each other. If you modify the game b

In the game of Prisoner's Dilemma, if the game is played for only one round, the optimal move is for both players to betray each other. If you modify the game by playing many rounds of the same two players choosing whether to cooperate or betray, cooperation continues as long as neither player knows how long the game will last. The moment either player learns when the last round will be, it once again becomes advantageous to betray, and to do so immediately, before your opponent gains the same information. You want to betray before you are betrayed, but to do so at the last possible moment. I think there's something to be learned there about the connection between climate change, and the charge towards mass surveillance and authoritarian government.

ianai 8y ago
I’m not following. I’ve heard that the change would benefit certain areas of the world. Ie Russia may warm up and gain more hospitable land. For this reason I’ve also heard some nations may be emissing greenhouse gasses.
- antoinevg 8y ago
  I think philipov is saying that the reason politicians are not acting is because they do not believe any action is possible. So, if they believe no action is possible this also means they view this as the last round in a game of prisoners dilemma they've been forced to play for most of the modern era. So, in their view, there is no more downside to defecting.
  - philipov 8y ago
    Yes, precisely. Or, to put it another way, politicians are acting to prepare for climate change. The action they are taking is to tighten control in anticipation of global disaster. Also, I think this game is playing out not just between politicians and populace, but at all scales of society and business, as no individual actor has the power to take corrective action alone, or is otherwise pinned in a Mexican Standoff. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_standoff https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_standoff

ianai 8y ago

I’m not following. I’ve heard that the change would benefit certain areas of the world. Ie Russia may warm up and gain more hospitable land. For this reason I’ve also heard some nations may be emissing greenhouse gasses.

antoinevg 8y ago
I think philipov is saying that the reason politicians are not acting is because they do not believe any action is possible. So, if they believe no action is possible this also means they view this as the last round in a game of prisoners dilemma they've been forced to play for most of the modern era. So, in their view, there is no more downside to defecting.
- philipov 8y ago
  Yes, precisely. Or, to put it another way, politicians are acting to prepare for climate change. The action they are taking is to tighten control in anticipation of global disaster. Also, I think this game is playing out not just between politicians and populace, but at all scales of society and business, as no individual actor has the power to take corrective action alone, or is otherwise pinned in a Mexican Standoff. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_standoff https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_standoff