= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Viliam_Bur comments on Debate between 80,000 hours and a socialist - 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 (71)
Prisonner's dilemma for N players is more complex than for 2 players.
For iterated 2 player's dilemma, you cooperate when the other player cooperates, and defect when the other player defects. Always cooperating is not the best strategy; you need to respond to the other player's actions.
When you have 100,000,000 player's prisonner's dilemma, where 60,000,000 players defect and 40,000,000 players cooperate, what exactly are you supposed to do? To make it even more difficult, cooperation has non-zero costs (you have to do some research about political candidates), and it's not even obvious whether the expected payoff is greater than this.
Actually you only cooperate if the other player would defect if you didn't cooperate. If they cooperate no matter what, defect.