= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Sorry for the petty complaint, but I'm disinclined to participate because I don't like Lisp syntax (and don't want to have at learn a new programming language just for this anyway).
In response to
Prisoner's Dilemma (with visible source code) Tournament
Same here.
If it were in Java or Python, we could get a whole lot more participants. And more readers who understand the source of the submissions.
Actually, if a real-world analog to Newcomb's Problem ever came up in my real life, there's a not-insignificant chance that I would turn down the $1000 in the transparent box as well and just walk away -- that is, that I would zero-box -- under the general principle that if I don't trust the motives of the person setting up the game I do better not to take any of the choices they are encouraging me to take, no matter how obvious the choices may seem. Maybe I've wandered into the next Batman movie the box is poisoned or something.
Of course, if you insist on rejecting the setup to Newcomb's Problem rather than cooperating with it, you'll never get to see whether there's anything valuable being set up.
I think inherent in the problem is the condition that you fully understand what is going on and you know you aren't part of some weird trick.
It's not realistic, but being realistic isn't the point of the problem.
View more: Prev
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
I very much doubt this. At best we'd get a lot more people who are excited to participate but loose interest once they realize they have no idea how to write a program to parse the opposing bot.
At worst that is what would happen.
Java and Python are many orders of magnitude more popular than Scheme and if only 10% of the people who get excited about participating actually know how to parse than we would still have much greater numbers.