3 ms·

We're not talking about an extra variable here or there, we're talking about the equivalent to string theory which is famously intractable. It's an n-body probl

We're not talking about an extra variable here or there, we're talking about the equivalent to string theory which is famously intractable. It's an n-body problem where n = ?????? and you don't know any of the boundary conditions. It's not random and inscrutable, but it sure isn't conducive to naive academic analyses like game theory. Just because you can model something simple, doesn't mean you can predict something as complicated as reality. The science of biology, sociology, psychology, and economics have proven that over and over again - geopolitics is all of those combined and more.

s1artibartfast 3y ago
maybe there is a disconnect on what we call prediction. There is more than enough information to predict if China would be in favor or against US building a military base in Taiwan. There isn't enough information to predict what Xi Jinping will have for breakfast.
- throwup238 3y ago
  There's definitely a disconnect because if that's the best example of a game theoretic prediction, I stand by my statement that game theory is useless in geopolitics. What would China's first concrete move be after it's final final warning [1]? Which faction in the party would have most influence over Xi Jinping in such an event and how much influence do they have over the military? How much would China be willing to compromise it's status as a trading partner with the West if push comes to shove? Those would be useful predictions that can be acted on. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%27s_final_warning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%27s_final_warning
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    That wasnt intended as the best example, but the end of a range for predictive specificity (with breakfast being the other end). After thinking for a while, I think it also depends on your definition of game theory.
  - maxglute 3y ago
    China's final warning meme is actually very illustrative. The context is PRC was both warning and doing - actively attempting to shoot down TW / US based U2s despite having limited capabilities. The chefs kiss that this is an USSR meme is that PRC end up shooting down more U2s using modified soviet hardware than USSR herself. Even more so when consider PRC issued final warning to USSR that ended up in border skirmishes. PRC's actual final warning is "don't say we didn't warn you" has been predictative of PRC kinetic action with near certainty. USSR/India border skirmishes. Korean war against UN. PRC also has directly supported North Vietnam against the French, and threatened UK when they hinted at granting HK independence under Thatcher. That's every NPT nuclear state over territorial/security issues less important than TW. It doesn't always lead to immediate action, but has consistently been prelude to it.

s1artibartfast 3y ago

maybe there is a disconnect on what we call prediction. There is more than enough information to predict if China would be in favor or against US building a military base in Taiwan. There isn't enough information to predict what Xi Jinping will have for breakfast.

throwup238 3y ago
There's definitely a disconnect because if that's the best example of a game theoretic prediction, I stand by my statement that game theory is useless in geopolitics. What would China's first concrete move be after it's final final warning [1]? Which faction in the party would have most influence over Xi Jinping in such an event and how much influence do they have over the military? How much would China be willing to compromise it's status as a trading partner with the West if push comes to shove? Those would be useful predictions that can be acted on. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%27s_final_warning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%27s_final_warning
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  That wasnt intended as the best example, but the end of a range for predictive specificity (with breakfast being the other end). After thinking for a while, I think it also depends on your definition of game theory.
- maxglute 3y ago
  China's final warning meme is actually very illustrative. The context is PRC was both warning and doing - actively attempting to shoot down TW / US based U2s despite having limited capabilities. The chefs kiss that this is an USSR meme is that PRC end up shooting down more U2s using modified soviet hardware than USSR herself. Even more so when consider PRC issued final warning to USSR that ended up in border skirmishes. PRC's actual final warning is "don't say we didn't warn you" has been predictative of PRC kinetic action with near certainty. USSR/India border skirmishes. Korean war against UN. PRC also has directly supported North Vietnam against the French, and threatened UK when they hinted at granting HK independence under Thatcher. That's every NPT nuclear state over territorial/security issues less important than TW. It doesn't always lead to immediate action, but has consistently been prelude to it.