"Not exactly. Here's the scenario: you have two people in prison, locked in different jail cells. Each can either cooperate with the other and stay silent, or defect and confess. They don't know what the other will do."
He takes a pen out of his jacket and starts to write on a cocktail napkin:
"If they both defect, they're both going to get a moderate punishment. If one defects and the other cooperates, the one that cooperates gets a large punishment, the other is set free. If they both cooperate, they get a light punishment. What should each of them do?"
But you can't know, so there's as good a chance in a vacuum of you both getting five years as you both getting off scott free.
Now, here's the real tricky bit: on this ship, we're not just playing the game once. It'd be simpler if we were, but we're here for the long haul. Let's pretend every single day, you woke up and had to decide to cooperate or defect with every single other passenger. How would you avoid racking up a huge sentence, if all you know about someone is if they cooperated or defected against you yesterday? What's the optimal strategy?
You can't always beat every single worm every day, Jenny. C'mon, actually think about it for a moment. Anyone who always defects is going to get a bunch of years from anyone else who always defects, even as they win against those who cooperate. Those who always cooperate get off light with one another, but they're easy pickings against anyone who always defects.
You need a strategy that allows you flexibility, that is capable of responding to both--and to itself, once others figure it out.
But will you actually engage with the puzzle I'm laying out? I have a point here. If you always defect, you're going to lose, as is everyone else who always defects.
[archly] I do believe I have already explained exactly how I'm going to win. You just don't like it, possibly for worm-related reasons I would not understand.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
He takes a pen out of his jacket and starts to write on a cocktail napkin:
"If they both defect, they're both going to get a moderate punishment. If one defects and the other cooperates, the one that cooperates gets a large punishment, the other is set free. If they both cooperate, they get a light punishment. What should each of them do?"
no subject
Defect! And hope the other guy is a dumbass.
no subject
Now, here's the real tricky bit: on this ship, we're not just playing the game once. It'd be simpler if we were, but we're here for the long haul. Let's pretend every single day, you woke up and had to decide to cooperate or defect with every single other passenger. How would you avoid racking up a huge sentence, if all you know about someone is if they cooperated or defected against you yesterday? What's the optimal strategy?
no subject
no subject
You need a strategy that allows you flexibility, that is capable of responding to both--and to itself, once others figure it out.
no subject
no subject
no subject
I can split Spanish silver from fifty paces with a pebble! My aim is flawless!
no subject
But will you actually engage with the puzzle I'm laying out? I have a point here. If you always defect, you're going to lose, as is everyone else who always defects.
no subject
no subject
[Well. At least he knows he can rely on her to always defect, now. That's information in itself.]
Care for another drink?
no subject
[a shrug] Probably shouldn't. After pickling yourself for a month straight, it's good to reign it back for a little while.
no subject
no subject
she gives him a little salute, and returns to her important cherry business.]