46
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2023
46 points (88.3% liked)
Videos
14152 readers
325 users here now
For sharing interesting videos from around the Web!
Rules
- Videos only
- Follow the global Mastodon.World rules and the Lemmy.World TOS while posting and commenting.
- Link directly to the video source and not for example an embedded video in an article.
- Don't be a jerk
- No advertising
- Avoid clickbait titles. (Tip: Use dearrow)
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Just watched this, a few hours ago.
What I don't get is that t4t strategy is reactionary, what if in the real world another nation/person/entity does something so drastic that you csnnot retaliate and annihilate you.
Pro active strategies might not win in game theory but it may as well ensure your survival in real life.
Or even if they don't annihilate you, it still gives them so much of an advantage that any future games are biased in their favor.
As far as I understand, tit for tat will lose most individual duels. But it does cooperate a lot and makes lots of points as a whole. Proactive strategies win more, but they do not cooperate a lot (especially against each other), and in the end, they make fewer points. In real life, annihilating someone would make others not want to cooperate with you. So the options would be either to annihilate everyone or no one.
Yeah, from what I understand. If it an one-off encounter (annihilate each other), then tit for tat will lose most of the times. That is original version Prisoner's dilemma and the answer for that version is you all should betray each other. When the scenario is not an one-off encounter but a repeated once then tit for tat will win most of the times.