4 ms·
Other morals: Being "nice" (copycat) is not the same as being a "sucker" (cooperator). Suckers don't make things worse just for themselves, but for everyone a
by lvxferre 5y ago
Other morals:
Being "nice" (copycat) is not the same as being a "sucker" (cooperator).
Suckers don't make things worse just for themselves, but for everyone around them, by encouraging bad behaviour.
Even then, people make mistakes, so don't hold grudges for too long. They won't lead you very far.
- cycomanic 5y agoJust based on the game, suckers are not really the problem. If you turn down interactions for example even the copycat (or weak copycat) looses against the all cheat. So it's not that the always coorporate creates the bad situation.
- lvxferre 5y agoThat's because the copycat, in the first interaction, works exactly the same as the cooperator. And the outcome of that first interaction becomes more important if there are less of them. The problem I see only pops up when there are more interactions - when the player knows the other will cheat, but still decides to cooperate.
- Gauge_Irrahphe 5y agoI think the problems of miscommunication could be fully avoided if you: 1. retaliate when cheated (since you cannot know if it was intentional or not) 2. expect but ignore the retaliation after you cheat by mistake. As a bonus, you can punish the opponent for not retaliating by cheating until they do retaliate. Anyway this is all academic and theoretical, since IRL there is rarely the option to retaliate without being treated as the original wrongdoer at best and as mentally unstable at worst.