4 ms·
I read an amusing analysis of Chicken, but I can't recall where, pointing out that playing against an omniscient opponent gave you an unassailable advantage.
by sjcsjc 7y ago
I read an amusing analysis of Chicken, but I can't recall where, pointing out that playing against an omniscient opponent gave you an unassailable advantage. You just determine not to swerve come what may and your all-knowing opponent would have no choice but to swerve.
- dodobirdlord 7y agoThis is an example of the more general game theory advantage of commitment.[0, 1] An agent in a multi-agent game benefits from being able to commit to a strategy. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precommitment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precommitment [1] https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/game-theory/commitment/6CA322FDE419BE053064A7E213616394 https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/game-theory/commitment/...
- satori99 7y agoThere is great demonstration of this in action on a British game show with the players being in a prisoners dilemma situation; https://youtu.be/S0qjK3TWZE8?t=72 https://youtu.be/S0qjK3TWZE8?t=72
- yesenadam 7y agoPlanners, of course, proceed on the assumption that the future is not 'already here', that they are not dealing with a predetermined – and therefore predictable – system, that they can determine things by their own free will, and that their plans will make the future different from what it would have been had there been no plan. And yet it is the planners, more than perhaps anyone else, who would like nothing better than to have a machine to foretell the future. Do they ever wonder whether the machine might incidentally also foretell their own plans before they have been conceived? – EF Schumacher, Small Is Beautiful: Economics As If People Mattered (1973)
- AmericanChopper 7y agoA strategy once highlighted (more or less) in this game show: https://youtu.be/S0qjK3TWZE8 https://youtu.be/S0qjK3TWZE8