General / Off-Topic A brilliant demonstration about the mechanics of trust and cooperation

[Adept]

Unless you're into game theory it's a good bet some of this will be new to you. If it were up to me, this would be mandatory learning material for all politicians at the very least. The basics should be taught at school

THE EVOLUTION OF TRUST

 

[GJ51]

Thank goodness it's not up to you.

 

[Adept]

It takes about 30 minutes to play through the demonstration. Commenting without trying it out is pretty futile.

 

[GJ51]

I didn't need that long to determine that it wasn't something that was going to teach me any significant life lesson.

I actually did try it.

It's no more instructive than real life experience. In fact, probably quite less.

Idealism is great, but it's just not what we experience in the real world.

 

[Minonian]

Game theory huh? Nothing new, and i'm not changing & choosing + more importantly!!! Developed my behaviour randomly, but with the knowledge of all of this.

And now... Let's see what happens if we changing the rule set somehow like this. Cheating have an increasingly negative payoff (you got punished harder and harder) but there is also a room of error because mis communications accidents, the second part is about a more lifelike environment. while the first?

The good ole spock quote.

"The needs of many"? honestly? who cares about cheaters? No one, not even the other cheaters!

Also? the increasing negative payoff, based on an advanced modell of 3 strikes.

 

[Morbad]

The first question didn't have my answer, so I couldn't proceed.

 

[Minonian]

Also, there is an error in all game theory simulations. They are all dealing with individuals, but in a group. The flaw? No society, and social interactions between the individuals. imagine if all person knows / can know trough his network what's the other's game. This is more lifelike correct?

 

[Gortron]

I didn't need that long to determine that it wasn't something that was going to teach me any significant life lesson.

I actually did try it.

It's no more instructive than real life experience. In fact, probably quite less.

Idealism is great, but it's just not what we experience in the real world.

I had a little go at it also. It became clear pretty quickly it was a load of rubbish.

 

[Minonian]

Yeah... We already know cheaters & simpletons not going to like / understand it so they say it's just stupid. (naturally, out of interest) And also out of interest they will do whatever it takes to force the others play nicely. Guess what? Not gonna happen. EVER!

However? Copycats, copykittens and grudgers can get along. And luckily this copykitten have enough brain and a good pair of eyes, to killcheaters and simpletons on sight, do not play a single round with them.

Yup... this is you Adept a grudger.

The rest of it just the cannon fodder. (also i know grudgers as avenger. cheaters as hawk. and so on, but it's the same thing.

Edit; learning method? Simpleton. After all, if everything else fails, brute force hacking still a valid method.

 

[Adept]

I had a little go at it also. It became clear pretty quickly it was a load of rubbish.

Huh? It really isn't. Game theory is genuine science and the demonstration is really well done. Maybe you are politically opposed to the implications, but that doesn't invalidate the science.

 

[Minonian]

One more thing. There are no such thing as zero sum game. If you can't get out something from it, that's a loss, because you can spend that time more fruitful.
And since against certainly tactics's the best you can hope is a no win scenario? You must KOS em to minimize / eliminate losses.

Yes. Just to get zero there must be a payoff.

 

[The Chairmaker]

It would be interesting to run the simulation whereby the cheaters can spy on the others and know what they are going to select.

Now run it with different groups all having spys and see who wins.

Now have it with imperfect spying were one group has more accurate spying info than the other.

That provides a more real world scenario from my point of view. Cheaters will naturally be first to spy, those who are grudging or copycats will only spy when they discover cheaters are spying.

 

[Adept]

It would be interesting to run the simulation whereby the cheaters can spy on the others and know what they are going to select.

Now run it with different groups all having spys and see who wins.

Now have it with imperfect spying were one group has more accurate spying info than the other.

That provides a more real world scenario from my point of view. Cheaters will naturally be first to spy, those who are grudging or copycats will only spy when they discover cheaters are spying.

This is why it really matters how societies and various transactions are set up. It's also relevant in game design (hi Elite devs). One has to assume that if the opportunity to cheat is there, a significant percentage of people will take it, and that will erode the trust for everybody.

***

The demonstration also helps to illustrate how important stable and honest societies are as people are growing up. We are not stupid creatures. We adapt and learn what the surrounding society is like. Somebody living in a bleak gangland, or even worse, a war torn country, will not in general develop into a trusting and cooperative person. Much of the success of the Nordic countries comes from the fact that the playing field has been set up so that trust and cooperation can emerge and flourish. Societies set up according to cold Social Darwinist logic will produce people who are suspicious and selfish (because they don't expect others to reciprocate in honest cooperation).

It also explains the problems and hard attitudes we are currently seeing in the former Soviet states, from Eastern Germany to Hungary and Russia itself. It will most likely take a generation or two for the damages to heal.

 

[The Chairmaker]

<SNIP>
It also explains the problems and hard attitudes we are currently seeing in the former Soviet states, from Eastern Germany to Hungary and Russia itself. It will most likely take a generation or two for the damages to heal.

You can say the same with regard to the USA.

The USA is a very individualistic society where society itself is mistrusted by a significant section of the population. Hence a side effect of that could be seen as the need for people to have guns to protect themselves from others. One of the arguments of the gun lobby is the ability to keep the state in check.

Paranoia and fear are manifest throughout all walks of American society as a direct result of its nature. This shapes internal political policies and also how it handles foreign relations. America has to cheat because everyone else must be cheating, regardless of if this is actually correct.

 

[bitstorm]

That was really interesting cheers.

I approved of Twitter's move to 280 characters!

 

[Minonian]

Paranoia and fear are manifest throughout all walks of American society as a direct result of its nature. This shapes internal political policies and also how it handles foreign relations. America has to cheat because everyone else must be cheating, regardless of if this is actually correct.

Correct for my part i saying trust must be earned, and you can't give it just like that.

Hm; I stand corrected. How i begin said? have a faith, but always lift the (card)deck. meaning? Don't give a stranger the opportunity, to cheat you. And only allow the people close enough to you, whom you can trust. Still not an insurance, but in the other hand? There are levels of safety.

You can't have trust if you can't give it. But how much trust you can give, and receive?

Edit; Also i guess this is why game theory is just like this. 'Murica.

Edit2; Also? Why the hell someone thinking about spying when i talk about social networks, and connections? There can be any rational reason alongside for some reason this is how he thinks? And why? There must be a reason if to someone always that comes to his / her mind.

Why there is the fact most net activists and people can only think on the terms of spying when we talking about getting informations know each others? [weird] I guess some peoples mindset is just as screwed up it can possibly gets...
Nothing personal but there is a dumpload of people's in the net whom can only think in this way, and this raises some questions, and also? these are the people whom have so much problems with the government and secret agencies. Yup... The hacktivists, and their merry little band of tin foil hatter followers, but in the meanwhile they are guilty in the crime which one they are charging others.

 

[Minonian]

BUMP!

If you spying on someone, causing problems to him whom problem in the first place with you the lack of trust, that's why he did not told you anything, that's why he did not allowed you near to himself?

What you causing with that?

GOOD MORNING STARSHINE!!!

 

[Adept]

You can say the same with regard to the USA.

The USA is a very individualistic society where society itself is mistrusted by a significant section of the population. Hence a side effect of that could be seen as the need for people to have guns to protect themselves from others. One of the arguments of the gun lobby is the ability to keep the state in check.

Paranoia and fear are manifest throughout all walks of American society as a direct result of its nature. This shapes internal political policies and also how it handles foreign relations. America has to cheat because everyone else must be cheating, regardless of if this is actually correct.

That is a good observation. Even here in nanny-state Finland the characteristic trait of those on the political right is the constant suspicion that people are untrustworthy, and hence it's ok to bend to truth to achieve your aims. Everybody's doing it after all. Same goes for the "feminist guys are only pretending to get laid".

I have a feeling that the US used to be more trusting and communal back in the day. New Deal, and all that. Does it seem like attitudes have been getting harder in recent decades?

 

[Minonian]

I think this too cyclic.
If a society becoming more trusty the ecological cabin of cheaters and other kind of exploiters are opening up, but with their appearance the naives are either learn whats going on, or die out and with that, the cheaters widow of opportunity closes, the society roughens up against them. Less cheater? society starts to heal, and opens up, and with that the whole process starts over.

 

[Morbad]

America has to cheat because everyone else must be cheating, regardless of if this is actually correct.

I don't think the average American citizen or policy maker believes the US can cheat. I think they feel the US is entitled to write the rules, and to tailor those rules to it's needs, then apply them to everyone.

I have a feeling that the US used to be more trusting and communal back in the day. New Deal, and all that. Does it seem like attitudes have been getting harder in recent decades?

Closed and provincial maybe, but that's not the same as trusting and communal.

As for the New Deal, it was a populist political platform to take advantage of the opposition's apparent unwillingness to solve the people's problems. Given a similar situation, it's something Trump wouldn't hesitate to propose...however, different times and different problems require different scapegoats and different deals.