Comments on: Why cooperation fails, and how to fix the problem using game theory

By: Presh

Presh — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 00:32:45 +0000

@Ryan: Thanks for sharing the story. I really do think every roommate situation includes a bit of conflict about cleaning. We also have a self-serving bias in thinking when we don’t clean it’s because we’re too busy whereas if others don’t clean its because they are lazy.

@Kyle: That is a painful Boy Scouts example, though you probably learned a good lesson. The Prisoner’s dilemma is technically slightly different: in that case there is a dominant strategy to rat, so the only Nash equilibrium is for both to rat. In my examples, there are two equilibriums–both the bad “default” one and the good “coordination” one.

@Rohit: The main takeaway of the prisoner’s dilemma is that the socially good outcome cannot be reached since the prisoners have a dominant strategy of ratting each other out. And as Kyle discussed, when you try to act nice, it hurts even more when you get stabbed in the back.

By: RohoMech

RohoMech — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 22:02:39 +0000

Well, when I think of the prisoner’s dilemma, I usually think along the lines of asymmetrical power. Specifically, the prisoners have 0 power while the guards have enough to keep them in jail. So, really the prisoners are already screwed, but they can try to minimize how badly they are screwed. Even with communication, they’d still have a year in jail.

By: Kyle

Kyle — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 19:45:42 +0000

I’ve heard of this topic presented than as the Prisoner’s dilemma. Two co-conspirators are arrested for a crime. They are individually imprisoned and given the chance to narc upon one another. If neither talks, they will both serve a year, since there is insufficient edivence to convict them of any major charges. If only one talks while the other remains silent, the stool pidgeon gets 6 months while the other one is imprisoned for something like 15 years. If both rat each other out, they will both serve a 20 year sentance and dine nightly upon prison delicacies like toilet vodka.

Unfortunately, I’ve also had the experience of being put through something similar to this at work at the Boy Scout camp. Two teams in the final round of some annoying competition were to come to concord upon prize money that would be used for a party. The prizes were something like 100 bucks per team, 150 bucks for the team that choses to screw, and zero dollars for the teams that turn upon each other. I was on the team that decided to play the game passively and hope for similar compassion for the other team. We lost, the other team’s leader conviced his team to turn upon us, knowing full well our choice prior to submitting our choice, and they in turn, garnered the fury of a team scorned.

I digress, good stuff.

By: Ryan Healy

Ryan Healy — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 15:53:27 +0000

Great post, Presh. I can totally relate to the roommate situation. We had a dirty apartment for about a month when we both neglected to clean. Then my roommate started cleaning his stuff and I was content. Obviously, he wasn’t. One night, after a few drinks we got in a shouting match about the whole ordeal.

The discussion resulted in both of us cleaning and both of us being happy.

It’s really interesting that the best solution in both of these cases is to collaborate, discuss and coordinate. All unselfish actions.