I'm pretty sure SlateStarCodex coined the term, in reference to game theory. It's originally from an Alan Ginsberg poem, and I've never seen it anywhere else i

I'm pretty sure SlateStarCodex coined the term, in reference to game theory. It's originally from an Alan Ginsberg poem, and I've never seen it anywhere else in game theory literature. The game-theoretical term is a "Nash equilibrium", which is the state that reality ends up in if every participant follows their own incentives (i.e. no participant can improve their individual outcome by altering their decisions). It is possible - even very common in many real-life games - to end up with a negative Nash equilibrium. The classic example is the Prisoner's Dilemma, where the globally-optimal solution is for neither player to defect, but each individual improves their own outcome by defecting, and so what actually happens is that both suspects confess. It's also possible to achieve a positive Nash equilibrium out of morally-abhorrent individual choices. Mutually-assured destruction is a good example. The game is setup so that if either superpower launches their missiles, humanity ends. Therefore, both superpowers have an incentive to avoid nuclear war, and we're still here.