Reminds me of a game theory experiment they ran as a competition. Build a bot that gets the most resources in a deal-making market. The optimal solution is tit

Reminds me of a game theory experiment they ran as a competition. Build a bot that gets the most resources in a deal-making market. The optimal solution is tit-for-tat. And it leads to a stable equilibrium for the market as a whole and everyone is better off. But if you know everyone else is playing tit-for-tat, then you can exploit that by always taking advantage. Then you win. But if too many other bots also make that same realization, everything collapses again. The whole market is worse off. China, in this case, is playing a lot like that one player who noticed everyone else believes in free markets. If you’re the only player with the opposite strategy, it works great … until others start changing. Then everyone is worse off. Although whether markets were ever free free is a questionable claim at best. Are there economies without subsidies and without tax breaks?