3 ms·
Tit-for-tat. From my scarce knowledge of game-theory and world-politics it is generally accepted as the default move in these types of situations. But well, if
by tekkk 7y ago
Tit-for-tat. From my scarce knowledge of game-theory and world-politics it is generally accepted as the default move in these types of situations.
But well, if India sees Huawei as security threat, shouldn't they have a quite good justification for blocking them? It's not that they are outright punishing Huawei for just existing, but that there is, in their opinion, a real cause for them to fear Huawei of spying their networks behalf of Chinese government?
Although the real reason would be a lot more nuanced as usual with politics. But to me it seems a bit unfair. Russia and China (and others, sure) have effectively blocked many foreign companies in different sectors in their respective countries because of security reasons, so why India isn't allowed to do the same thing?
- jrhurst 7y agoHonestly things like phones and their networks should be built and maintained in their home nations
- alexis_fr 7y agoand email hosting. Email hosting is a big deal.
- erikpukinskis 7y agoWorks well on games. Only problem is trade isn’t a game. Or, to put it another way, you have no idea when your opponent will stop playing this game and start playing another one.
- chillacy 7y agoI think "game theory" applies to more situations than the name might imply..
- __s 7y agoGame theory is about decision making. If you reject game theory, you reject rational decision making being possible. Note that game theory is still useful in the context of making good decisions against irrational decision makers. Your "put another way" is merely pointing out that often in real world scenarios the game's rules are often part of the unknown information Everything involving decisions is a game. Trade is a game