4 ms·
It's a known problem. Eg check out optimal strategies to the prisoner's dilemma. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma https://en.wikipedia.org/wi
by Herring 2y ago
It's a known problem. Eg check out optimal strategies to the prisoner's dilemma.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma
> The winning deterministic strategy was tit for tat, developed and entered into the tournament by Anatol Rapoport. It was the simplest of any program entered, containing only four lines of BASIC,[10] and won the contest. The strategy is simply to cooperate on the first iteration of the game; after that, the player does what his or her opponent did on the previous move.[11] Depending on the situation, a slightly better strategy can be "tit for tat with forgiveness": when the opponent defects, on the next move, the player sometimes cooperates anyway, with a small probability (around 1–5%, depending on the lineup of opponents). This allows for occasional recovery from getting trapped in a cycle of defections.
Extremely straightforward, and in real-world settings (business, politics, relationships), moderate forgiveness usually wins in the long run.
- MichaelZuo 2y agoThose percentages don’t seem right. I’ve never heard of anyone in the tech industry even lasting through 20 rounds of mutual defections with a peer opponent, in any real world conflict. Let alone 100 rounds, or to continue as a live player. Because in reality there’s almost always escalation to higher and higher stakes.
- Herring 2y agoI'm not sure what you mean, those orgs last for decades and countries last for hundreds of years. But I'm sure you can tweak the percentages depending on the situation and your own judgement. It's a rule of thumb too and can be exploited if you're not careful, eg someone can save defections for when it really matters (getting a supreme court seat). > Because in reality there’s almost always escalation to higher and higher stakes. Well clearly no, because the world is not constantly at war (the highest escalation).
- MichaelZuo 2y agoCan you provide an example of one “org” in the tech industry that has defected twenty times in a row against a peer? > Well clearly no, because the world is not constantly at war (the highest escalation). The world is not constantly at war because it’s almost always settled way before the count hits 20.