Guest chunky Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 what is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doublename Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 The goal keeper's anxiety at the penalty kick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LimpyLoo Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 wikipedia: start with the prisoner's dilemma (the mother of all game theory games...essentially the premise behind split or steal) then take a look at evolutionary psychology poker the ultimatum game newcomb's problem doping in sports and padding resumes nuclear war and mutually-assured destruction the sexual arms race abstract stuff: bayesian analysis nash equilibrium psychology "standard gamble" behavioral economics signalling theory it's a huge huge field...lemme know if you want me to blather about any specific aspect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usagi Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 a mathematical discipline articulated by John Nash and other early pioneers in the fields of discrete math and computer science. used to describe the interactions of complex elements in various 'states of play', like a 'game'. often cited by pretentious cunts in discussions to which it is not particularly relevant or enlightening, because of its appeal in popular science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LimpyLoo Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 a mathematical discipline articulated by John Nash and other early pioneers in the fields of discrete math and computer science. used to describe the interactions of complex elements in various 'states of play', like a 'game'. often cited by pretentious cunts in discussions to which it is not particularly relevant or enlightening, because of its appeal in popular science. wow get a life dude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LimpyLoo Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 and since you're so knowledgeable on the topic could you give us all an example of a Nash equilibrium? (without consulting the internet, of course) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YO303 Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 limpyloo is the kind of guy who is an "expert" in everything, his posts are long but if you pay attention they say nothing, and for the most part repeats the same point on multiple posts. Usagi dont fall for this shit, you are much better than this, look what is happening in the north korea thread oh and game theory is a gameboy knock off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usagi Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 and since you're so knowledgeable on the topic could you give us all an example of a Nash equilibrium? (without consulting the internet, of course) no, because I haven't studied it enough to be able to talk about it intelligently in a conversation on WATMM, to which it is probably largely irrelevant anyway. and neither have you. look what is happening in the north korea thread I shudder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YO303 Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 game theory + watmm = oysters clams and cuckolds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugene Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 was nash a console gamer? if yes then fuck him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LimpyLoo Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 and since you're so knowledgeable on the topic could you give us all an example of a Nash equilibrium? (without consulting the internet, of course) no, because I haven't studied it enough to be able to talk about it intelligently in a conversation on WATMM, to which it is probably largely irrelevant anyway. and neither have you. look what is happening in the north korea thread I shudder. i play poker for a living game theory is literally my job so once again you're mistaken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LimpyLoo Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 limpyloo is the kind of guy who is an "expert" in everything, his posts are long but if you pay attention they say nothing, and for the most part repeats the same point on multiple posts. Usagi dont fall for this shit, you are much better than this, look what is happening in the north korea thread oh and game theory is a gameboy knock off. i don't claim to be an expert about anything you were saying this same shit in the Philip Seymour Hoffman thread when i was talking about opiates "don't believe him, he's got a story for everything!" like i was pretending to be a heroin addict to look cool or something there's only a handful of things i talk confidently about and anytime i post in a thread you say this same shit "limpyloo claims to be an expert at everything!" lol no i don't look at all the threads active on watmm and you'll see that i don't post in 90% of them because i know nothing about any of that stuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usagi Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 and since you're so knowledgeable on the topic could you give us all an example of a Nash equilibrium? (without consulting the internet, of course) no, because I haven't studied it enough to be able to talk about it intelligently in a conversation on WATMM, to which it is probably largely irrelevant anyway. and neither have you. look what is happening in the north korea thread I shudder. i play poker for a living game theory is literally my job hahahahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caze Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 don't sweat it limpy, some people just can't handle their entrenched ideologies being threatened. even if I disagreed with everything you said, you put it across in a sober and rational manner, if people can't deal with that shit they should either shut up, or respond in kind. the childish bickering it seems to cause on here is pretty pathetic imho (not from everyone of course, but you know who you are). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LimpyLoo Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 and since you're so knowledgeable on the topic could you give us all an example of a Nash equilibrium? (without consulting the internet, of course) no, because I haven't studied it enough to be able to talk about it intelligently in a conversation on WATMM, to which it is probably largely irrelevant anyway. and neither have you. look what is happening in the north korea thread I shudder. so let me get this straight... you accuse me of pretending to know anything about game theory to seem cool or whatever (because game theory is so cool) and then you come in here and...pretend to know anything about game theory?!? (umm ironi-lol) if you don't know what a nash equilibrium is, then why the hell are are doing in this thread? trying to get in a pissing match with me everywhere i post? that's some middle-school shit, usagi seriously lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auxien Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 What are the odds that I can open a possibly-interesting thread on WATMM and it not devolve into a shitfest within the first 10 posts? Game me a theory on that yo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doublename Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 10 posts¿ that's damn ambitious, man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LimpyLoo Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Alright then, let's do some Bayesian analysis on dat We gotta figure the frequency with which: -threads on watmm are 'possibly-interesting' (PI) -threads devolve into shitfest within 10 posts (SF) %(PI) x %(SF) = auxien But actually you said NOT devolve into shitfest So then we get %(PI) x [100 - %(SF)] = auxien But then you probably don't read every single possbly-interesting thread So we need the frequency with which you open up a possibly-interesting thread (AO) %(PI) x [100 - %(SF)] x %(AO) = auxien If you can figure out all those frequencies, then we can plug em in and get an answer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auxien Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 PI=10% SF=75% AO=50% If I did my bed-time algebra correctly then there's a 1.25% chance of a possibly-interesting thread (which I open and read) not devolving into a shitfest within ten posts. Amazing, that's slightly higher than I thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chenGOD Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 let's see if i can remember: Firm B's output will be on the left and firm A's output will be on the right in each quadrant (since I can't do tables in the board there will be no lines, so hopefully this is clear) FIRM A's OUTPUT One-half Two-Thirds Monopoly Monopoly Profit Profit F O One-half I U Monopoly 20|20 15|22 R T Profit M P U B' T Two-thirds s Monopoly 22|15 17|17 Profit Where's the Nash Equilibrium? Explain your answer, and what are the implications of a Nash equilibrium? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YangYing Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 sex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweepstakes Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 is this about Game of Thrones? I think I've heard of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LimpyLoo Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 let's see if i can remember: Firm B's output will be on the left and firm A's output will be on the right in each quadrant (since I can't do tables in the board there will be no lines, so hopefully this is clear) FIRM A's OUTPUT One-half Two-Thirds Monopoly Monopoly Profit Profit F O One-half I U Monopoly 20|20 15|22 R T Profit M P U B' T Two-thirds s Monopoly 22|15 17|17 Profit Where's the Nash Equilibrium? Explain your answer, and what are the implications of a Nash equilibrium? So, a Nash equilibrium occurs when players can no longer exploit each other. The behavior of both players will 'settle' into a Nash equilibrium. Here, there is a question as to whether the two firms can comminucate beforehand, and whether there are meta-game reasons not to cooperate. But if the firms are especially unfriendly they"ll just go in circles trying to exploit each other. And since there is no way to avoid being exploited... Bah I just woke up to piss and now I'm trying to solve game theory puzzles. Alright lemme think here... Okay, so the 'super-rational' solution (if they were playing against a mirror) then they would both choose 'one-half'. This is also the 'cooperate' solution. What I remember about the Prisoner's Dilemma with the classic payouts was that the (paradoxical) Nash equilibrium was that they both defect, as they both then cannot be exploited. So it must be that 17/17 is the Nash equilibrium...but no because they can still be exploited, so... There is no Nash equilibrium. (I think...I dunno, I'm bloody tired) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YEK Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 dank memes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LimpyLoo Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 (or perhaps I should just say "that's not realistic" so I don't actually have to think about it or solve it, and instead just berate you for posing such an unrealistic problem) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.