porncrank t1_jax63p7 wrote
Reply to comment by Diaphanouz in Game Theory's ultimate answer to real world dilemmas: "Generous Tit for Tat" by TryingTruly
I remember playing this and there are situations where you can make a large group of bad actors come out better than a greatly outnumbered group of (or individual) tit-for-tat — and if you just look at that group, you might think their bad philosophy “won”. However it is interesting to note that in that case they still all come out behind a similar sized community with a sufficient number of tit-for-tat.
I think the takeaway is that in a consistently lousy environment a lousy person might do better than a nice person. But they won’t do better than a nice person in a nice environment. Or even a lousy person in a nice environment. Said another way — it matters a lot who is around us no matter our strategy. We are not going to maximize life in isolation.
corpusapostata t1_jayl116 wrote
This gives an interesting slant to city planning, social services, and policing. If environment has that great an effect on outcome...
SeriousGoofball t1_jays2k1 wrote
Or political parties. Or even politics in general. If everybody in office is out for themselves then only the strongest Lucifer will win.
Oh-hey21 t1_jb13mtl wrote
Or just life. This can be viewed on so many different levels. I know this is rather vague, but where does this not hold up in any relationship?
BeardedZorro t1_jazej81 wrote
Wow. Way to go deeper. I need to learn to do more of this.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments