wedrifid comments on Decision Theory Paradox: PD with Three Implies Chaos? - Less Wrong

19 Post author: orthonormal 27 August 2011 07:22PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (56)
Tags: decision_theory tdt timeless

Comments (56)

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

Comment author: Jack 28 August 2011 04:26:08AM *  9 points [-]

Assume maximal selfishness: each agent is motivated solely to maximize its own number of children (the agent itself doesn't get returned!), and doesn't care about the other agents using the same decision theory, or even about its other "relatives" in the simulation.

...

Problem: The setup looks perfectly fair for TDT agents. So why do they lose? (Difficulty: 2+3i stars.)

Um, they don't lose. What the TDT agents care about is the number of children they have. If they cared about the total number of descendants they have the cost of cooperating with DefectBots or CliqueBots would be exponentially higher (and TDT would act as CliqueBots).

Edit: Come to think of it, they wouldn't act like CliqueBots. Unlike CliqueBots they would also cooperate with CooperateBots. And if you include CooperateBots in the simulation TDT would beat CliqueBots.

Comment author: wedrifid 28 August 2011 06:55:42AM 3 points [-]

Edit: Come to think of it, they wouldn't act like CliqueBots. Unlike CliqueBots they would also cooperate with CooperateBots. And if you include CooperateBots in the simulation TDT would beat CliqueBots.

Oh, good point. CliqueBot is a fail strategy! CliqueBot++ would need to allow exceptions such that it cooperates with (CliqueBoT++ && anything that it does not consider a serious rival).

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit