TobyBartels comments on Rationality Lessons in the Game of Go - Less Wrong

40 Post author: GreenRoot 21 August 2010 02:33PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (145)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: MatthewW 21 August 2010 11:12:27PM *  1 point [-]

On the other hand, there are some ways of thinking which are useful for Go but not for real life. One example is that damaging my opponent is as good as working for myself.

Another example is that, between equal players, the sunk costs fallacy is sometimes sound reasoning in Go. One form is "if I don't achieve goal X I've lost the game anyway, so I might as well continue trying even though it's looking unlikely". Another form (for stronger players than me) is "if I play A, I will get a result that's two points worse than I could have had if I played B earlier, so I can rule A out."

Comment author: TobyBartels 22 August 2010 12:24:22AM 3 points [-]

damaging my opponent is as good as working for myself

Right. That's because Go is a zero-sum game while real life is not.