3 ms·
This is literally the definition of iterated prisoner’s dilemma. The way to break the cycle and see more cooperation is to keep 1 round of memory. Put another
by coredog64 6y ago
This is literally the definition of iterated prisoner’s dilemma. The way to break the cycle and see more cooperation is to keep 1 round of memory. Put another way, acknowledge that norm breaking (defection) on round X was caused by norm breaking on round X-1 and allow it (or try to scale it back to an equivalent exception). What doesn’t work is ignoring all the times you defected and then trying to get in one last escalated defection because “fuck you, that’s why”
Unfortunately, that requires adults who can work together and a public that can deal with nuance.
- gpm 6y ago> The way to break the cycle and see more cooperation is to keep 1 round of memory. And betray on the last round, because that can only help you. But since that means everyone should betray on the last round, everyone should also betray on the second last round since that won't effect your opponents behavior next round anyways (they're already going to betray). And the third from last round. And fourth... And... actually just always betray. Simple computer algorithms do not fully capture the real world. And the simple algorithm that happens to have won a single tournament in which players could not see what other players were doing and adjust their strategy is not going to translate well to the real world.
- specialist 6y agoNorms are by mutual consent. So literally nothing like the prisoner's dilemma, iterated or otherwise.