31 ms·
This is an interesting article, but The Tragedy of the Commons is only 1 of 7 Nash Equilibrium possible. It was cherry picked for a funny thought experiment wh
by RugerRedhawk 15y ago
This is an interesting article, but The Tragedy of the Commons is only 1 of 7 Nash Equilibrium possible. It was cherry picked for a funny thought experiment where Joker is the good guy. Now let's try the Volunteer's Dilemma.
In the Volunteer's Dilemma a group is faced with an inevitable negative, and the only way prevent it is for one member to assume the negative unto himself. The classic example is jumping on the grenade. Nobody wants to do it, but somebody has to or everyone dies.
1) Assume Cooperators and Defectors only. Cooperators will eventually volunteer, Defectors never will. There can be a balance where Cooperators significantly outnumber Defectors, but if this balance is disturbed the population will eventually end.
2) Add Jokers. Jokers in this case would be like Defectors and never volunteer. Worse, however, is that Jokers would probably be so interested in the destruction that they would actively prevent volunteering. There can be no balance in a group with even one Joker still alive, and the population will end.
3) Add Batmen. Batmen neutralize the Jokers' ability to prevent volunteers, and are willing to volunteer themselves. The balance is restored as long as there are enough of these individuals to restore moral and put the group first.
So now in my thought experiment, Jokers are harbingers of the end while Batmen are necessary for survival.
- jonnathanson 15y agoSounds like the Volunteer's Dilemma is the scenario that played out in the movie The Dark Knight, actually.
- izend 15y agoI believe the scene with the ferries was an example of Prisoner's dilemma not Volunteer's Dilemma.
- jonnathanson 15y agoTrue. That scene was almost a textbook Prisoner's Dilemma case. But the overall arc of the movie -- concluding with Batman's needing to sacrifice himself for the greater good -- seems pretty Volunteery.
- m_myers 15y agoAre you the one who posted this exact comment on Reddit? http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/qw5y4/why_joker_and_not_batman_is_the_savior_of_us_all/c40z0hh http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/qw5y4/why_joker_and...
- bilbo0s 15y agoHow is scenario 3 different from scenario 1?
- bilbo0s 15y agoJust re-read your post. Scenario 3 includes a population of Jokers. That is the difference. So your assertion... is that Batmen only provide a benefit where there exist Jokers in the population. At least in the Volunteer's Dilemma.
- valuegram 15y agoEach of the scenarios 1 through 3 builds upon each other. The outcomes of 1 and 3 are similar, but in scenario 2 jokers are introduced into the mix, and in scenario 3 batmans are introduced to counteract the jokers. ...I believe the author is saying that if you have jokers, you need batmans to neutralize their effect.
- presidentender 15y agoShouldn't Batmen also have the ability to neutralize defectors?
- kstenerud 15y agoHow? By throwing anyone who refuses to "volunteer" on a live grenade?
- tofuii 15y agoit's funny, because, I think Batman would be considered a "joker" as well, he regulates defectors in his own trying to rationalize it while the joker creates chaos. Obviously, the batman prefers no loss of life.
- yassim 15y agoThere is also the possibility of a Joker pushing somebody (possibly multiple to be sure) else onto the grenade, thus saving their life and causing destruction. Which has 2 possible out comes in itself: 1) Joker pushed another Joker or Cooperator. Which might be uncomfortable for a time, but would pass. 2) Joker pushed a Defectors, in which case some Defectors would want some form justice. I have no numbers to prove this, just my feeling for the archetypes.