3 ms·

I don't think the Nash Equilibrium applies here. The consequence of defecting has to be better than cooperating, regardless of what the other player does. Here,

I don't think the Nash Equilibrium applies here. The consequence of defecting has to be better than cooperating, regardless of what the other player does. Here, you have to consider the probability that prosecution would be successful, which did not seem likely.

josu 12y ago
So the scenario is: If you don't defect -He defects first: You may or may not go to prison -He doesn't defect: You may or may not go to prison And if you defect first -He defects second: You don't go to prison -He doesn't defect: You don't go to prison Still seems to me that the Nash Equilibrium is to defect. Not going to prison is better than probably not going to prison. According to the article, they still don't talk to each other, so it's not like the outcome would have changed much.
- lovemenot 12y ago
  That was probably the logic the Feds used when designing this game. Actually, kind of surprising that Nestor did not go for it, based on my assessment of his character from this article.
  - james1071 12y ago
    More of a bluff than a prisoner's dilemma.