4 ms·
An intellectual-yet-idiot who placed too much hope and emphasis on game theory, despite the fact that it only works when agents are perfectly rational.
by DantesKite 5y ago
An intellectual-yet-idiot who placed too much hope and emphasis on game theory, despite the fact that it only works when agents are perfectly rational.
- beaconstudios 5y agoJohn Von Neumann: the first redditor
- friedman23 5y agoIf you are executing the nash equilibrium strategy, if your opponent deviates from the strategy you win by default.
- Imnimo 5y agoConsider the following game matrix, in which you pick a row and your opponent picks a column, and you receive the first payoff and your opponent receives the second. (100,100) (-100,99) (99,99) (98,98) The Nash equilibrium strategy is that you pick row 1 and your opponent picks column 1, each receiving 100 points. Once in this state, neither of you can improve by unilaterally changing your strategy. However, if your opponent irrationally deviates and takes column 2, receiving 99 instead of 100, you will get the catastrophic -100 payoff.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- rileymat2 5y agoI don’t think this is quite right, it requires the opponent to use the optimal strategy.
- Reuzel 5y agoI am not going to correct this statement, just please ask you not to use the word "intellectual-yet-idiot" to describe other people ever again. IYI is a great and new concept, and can be enlightening when correctly applied. Let us (pseudo)intellectuals cherish that value. EDIT: https://nassimtaleb.org/2016/09/intellectual-yet-idiot/ https://nassimtaleb.org/2016/09/intellectual-yet-idiot/ to add something interesting for others.
- 271828182846 5y agoafter reading that article it seems to me that "idiot-yet-intellectual" might be fitting JVN.
- Reuzel 5y agoYeah, after you reading that article, I totally agree. It might also be fitting to describe NN Taleb. The only one it does not fit, I think, would be Edward Snowden, the last cultural bastion of free speech and human rights protection.
- elzbardico 5y agoHave you ever wondered if your opinion is derived from first facts or based on a biased selection of sources that you've been exposed to? Not that I am telling this is the case, but have you ever considered that? I am generally curious, because saying John Von Neumann is IYI is a very courageous proposition.