= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
torekp comments on Maybe we're not doomed - 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 (46)
For 'prisoner's dilemma', substitute 'N-person prisoners' dilemma' and see how the terrain looks. In appropriate places of course. But also, on a more optimistic note, beware over use of the PD model. (Edited to add link)
Huh, maybe we should hold a tournament for iterated multi-person PD rules. The most interesting paper I found was this one and it just scratches the surface. Do you know if anyone's already done it?
It seems like cooperation should still work well, but I'm not sure how well different enforcement mechanisms would work, which might lead to a sizeable niche for defectors.
At this point you probably know more about it than I do. The reason I brought N-player PDs up, though, is because I expect that many of them are tough nuts to crack and mere iteration doesn't foster cooperation nearly so easily as in the 2-player version.