= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
DanielLC comments on Diplomacy as a Game Theory Laboratory - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (93)
Yes, but could you credibly do so? You can commit to anything you like; it's the credibility, not the commitment, that is the problem. Credibility can only be established by long-run tests, and then you run into the problem of distinguishing 70% from 50%.
You could roll the die so everyone else can't see them, then take a picture with your cell-phone. At the end, you can prove that you were doing what the die said.
Nothing could stop you from rolling the die until you get the wanted number, and then only publishing one result.
To be credible, you'd need a RNG that you can't use without everyone else knowing that you did (if not the specific result), which usually means a third party.
Online D&D uses trusted die-roller websites that keep logs of all the rolls made under one's name; you could have a variant where they just publish a hash of the results, rather than the results themselves.