16 ms·
Game theory says that considering climate change when China doesn’t is their wrong move. Dispite the fact that it produces a worse outcome compared to cooperati
by throw9away6 3y ago
Game theory says that considering climate change when China doesn’t is their wrong move. Dispite the fact that it produces a worse outcome compared to cooperation.
Nothing really terrible about this. It’s not really anti climate it’s about not using things with no defined value in project proposal considerations.
- Daishiman 3y agoSaying there's no defined value is just plain willful ignorance.
- thorncorona 3y ago> Game theory says that considering climate change when China doesn’t is their wrong move. because? > when China doesn’t this sounds wrong. source? > no defined value are you familiar with the concept of an expected value?
- NumberWangMan 3y agoThere's a game-theory solution to this, which is to impose a tax on imports from countries in order to make up for their lack of aggressiveness in addressing climate change, aka, a border-adjustment mechanism. It's not perfect, but it provides a way to encourage every country to work together by punishing ones that don't. It also discourages industries from outsourcing in order to skirt environmental regulations.
- wkat4242 3y agoClimate change isn't a game. It shouldn't be viewed in terms of win/lose. If we actually start doing something about the problem and China doesn't, there will be a lot of pressure on them to do so as well. Or risk exclusion from global markets.
- throw9away6 3y agoI don’t think the USA could put any more pressure on China then it already has without hurting themselves