= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
taryneast comments on Lawful Creativity - 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 (34)
If I get the difference between finite and infinite games... then I'm afraid I disagree.
Take, for example, the difference between "baseball" and "playing house".
Baseball is clearly a finite game - it makes sense to talk about a "winner" of baseball. Contrariwise, it makes no sense to talk about a "winner" of playing house - so I'd conclude that the latter is an infinite game.
From my own experience of "playing house" as a girl, I'd say there are definite candidates for optimisation - especially when playing with others. The most common (in my experience) being to optimise the average happiness level of each of the players (by sharing, avoiding or resolving disagreements etc).
Even if nobody "wins" you can still "play better" against this optimisation target.
carse uses words in weird ways. in carse jargon, playing house is a finite game.
As explained it doesn't fit the definition given: playing house does not have "definite rules" and does not have a defined beginning/end.
okay, playing house isn't actually a coherent category. there are ways to play house that have carse-jargon-“definite rules” and have a carse-jargon-defined-beginning&end, and there are ways to play house that don't. most instances of playing house are of the former type, likely including your experiences.
carse uses words in weird ways.