The Prisoner's Dilemma
Vložit
- čas přidán 3. 10. 2014
- The prisoners dilemma is a hypothetical game set up showing a situation where people won't want to work together even when it's beneficial to do so. It's just a long way of saying people don't like to be taken advantage of. Is often game theory 101.
Patreon patreon.com/user?u=849925
ITERATED PRISONER'S DILEMMA AND THE EVOLUTION OF COOPERATION • The Iterated Prisoner'...
EXTRA NOTES
Concerning "Cooperation"
Cooperation refers to cooperation between the two players. Not necessarily with outside parties like the police.
1)Always commit crimes alone.
2)Always keep your mouth shut.
3)Profit!
HeWhoShamesNarwhals Yeah like someone is going to be stupid enough to take blame for you and go to jail for x years. You would need to be a hot chick and promise neverending sex afterwards for that.
+Dweliq Are you fried
+Adrian Olechowski you can pay someone with the profit to go to jail for you for years wouldnt be the first guy
+Dweliq
Or be a cult leader. Cult leaders can get people to do whatever the fuck they want them to.
+Dweliq Do you know nothing about human psychology? I know enough Men/Women who have spent over 5 years taking someones wrap for things they weren't even involved in.
The best option is called "Give me my lawyer" which then will get you off because there is no actual proof.
Ian Phillips other than the minor offense of course. Which can be unsettling with a lousy case.
Ian Phillips
I like your pfp
oh jesus
i like this
OUR LORD HAS SPOKEN!
I did this game in a museum once. It was snitch or silent. I was playing with my dad and I would always snitch because I was a little selfish kid. Dad would always stay silent. I told him "Dad you have to try to get out" he would say "You're my daughter, I would never snitch on you" I now am so touched by that now but back then I said "just pretend I'm not"
Dang
Wow
Oof
Father: “Alright , time to go Candice.”
Daughter: “My name isn’t Candice who’s that?”
…
..
.
@@GoofyFang
Sweet home Alabama
The survey may have had more people cooperating because they had nothing to lose. They could just pick to cooperate because it’s the nice thing to do and there is no gain nor loss. If you brought money in (like 10$ or 5$) then I think the answers would be different since they have something to lose or gain.
Edit: I just realized something, if you had a HIGHER amount of money such as a $1000 then the results would also change drastically.
they do offer small money as incentive
They have conducted the dilemma in the real world under experimental conditions with monetary incentives. The interesting thing is that the results were influenced by what types of objects were in the room when the person was making their decision. Things we associate with business, brief cases, suits, so on, made people more inclined to defect almost 100% if the time. When filled with neutral objects, rucksack, teddy bears and so on, people were more inclined to cooperate again almost 100% of the time.
there is a TV show where they do this, but I do not remember what it is called.
Yes, just watch the game show Golden Balls
I'd always co-op.
Jessie and James were finally caught after trying to steal Pikachu so many times.
Tofu Kingpin nah, they will blast off the prison roof
finally
yes!!!
Tofu Kingpin what if they blast off again
fucking underrated this is
"This situation is pretty made-up, but has some real-world analogs... there's just 100 people in society, and they all smoke."
Elmo Humorless lol
Also, that example is bad. Advertising serves many more purposes than just translating to a larger ratio of sales relative to competitors. Brand recognition, image, recognition in general, and persuasion are also reasons to advertise. It's unrealistic to expect many consumers to purchase a product that they do not know exists, or know nothing about.
@@jacobp.2024 which in turn means more people buy your product
Elmo Humorless I’m not joking right when I saw your comment it showed the part in the video where it said that lmao
@@jacobp.2024 All the stuff you mentioned just leads into more sales lol
5:27 creeped me out to the highest extent possible.
anti-piracy screens be like
In Virtue's Last Reward :
Ally and Betray
In The Prisoner's dilemma :
Cooperate and Defect
A, B, C, D...
That's what I call perfection.
I knew there’d be another ZE fan in this comment section!
I just thinking about VLR
ah yes I am playing the game right now so this just made me laugh thx XD
lesgoooooo vlr
There's no extra option called 'pleading the fifth'?
+Garen Crownguard lol
+Garen Crownguard Pleading the fifth (5th Amendment) only means you don't have to provide testimony when it could incriminate you. 'Cooperating' as in not ratting out you partner is the same as just saying nothing to the authorities.
pleading the fifth only involves self-incrimination.
+Garen Crownguard You're better off using your miranda rights, like the right to remain silent. Then lawyer up and do as your lawyer says.
+Garen Crownguard Personally I think many game theory 'games' are flawed in that they omit some important options. Specifically, they almost never include any options which are entirely self-destructive. In one-off games, that's fine, but when you start dealing with repeated games where the agents have memory, it can have an effect. Modelling imperfect information is important too. If you and I are in a standoff with nuclear weapons, and I let off a nuke on my own people, I suffer a loss, but the public will think that you bombed me, so you might suffer an even larger loss.
Lawyers exist
Yeah Sure and if they hire the same lawyer, he/she can go back and forth :3
That's not the point
Yeah Sure, the video is simply describing a hypothetical dilemma, a thought experiment of sorts. The fact that there is more to decisions like this than the situation displays is irrelevant.
Yeah Sure fat american
It's hypothetical.
This was also shown in something called "The Evolution of Trust" by Nicky Case.
Funnily enough these things aren't the best at representing evolution because they don't take into account genetic relations.
Sad the amount of people missing the point and arguing semantics and non-sensical additonal options in the prisoner dilemma, people really need to use their brain and pay attention to what this video is actually about. It has nothing to do with the law or what to actually do in this situation.
Green Shaman I'm pretty sure those comments were jokes.
Also worth watching the related Iterated dilemma video: czcams.com/video/BOvAbjfJ0x0/video.html
EXACTLY.
Brydon Burrell or they understood, but they didn’t play by the rules because they didn’t feel like it
@Brydon Burrell but negative +negative =positive
This video is a great way to teach a punnet square
i will drink your blood
+copiright infridgement ooooo so scurry
Combat Kool-Aid your blood is kool aid right?
oh yeah oh yeah oh yeah
My science teacher did about three lessons total on punnett squares...
Fucking degenerate...
PUNNETT SQUARE
finally it has a use other than figuring out genes
Lmfaaoo
Always have been
Oh yeah also math
Dio: *Slams Betray Button*
That fucking Asshole. And Alice too.
i hAvE a MisSioN tO accOmpLisH
DIOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!
ah finally a vlr reference
Virtues Last Reward! SOSJSSNNS THAT GAME IS SOOOOO GOODDDDDDD
Always defect if your opponent's name is Dio...
BETRAY
"Kono Dio daaaaaa"
I was literally waiting for a VLR comment 😂
Always.
Jojo
they put a picture of a baby on cigarette advertising?!
The ad looks really old, it was probably made back when it would be acceptable to put a baby on a cigarette ad
Baruch Vlogs yeah but still
***** ik they thought it was "good" for you
+Mario Velez no
A baby who has had cigarettes administered prenatally, no less... For maximum growth and mump prevention, as 'scientifically proven'. It almost implies the kid should start smoking as soon as possible, like about this toddler, for 'maximum benefits'. From this to 'only GM crops can feed the world population' and yet people still wonder why 'science', as paid for by corporations, has acquired a bad reputation...
In England it's illegal to advertise tobacco products. So the companies end up benefitting from it.
+Jonas Hamill There's a difference. In this example, it assumes that EVERYONE smokes. So the companies are making money no matter what.
In a society where only a fraction of people smoke, the advertisements are worth a lot more.
PopsicleIncorporated No but the cigarette companies are benefiting from it. It's a well known bit of trivia that since the advertising ban on tobacco products, companies are making more money.
+Jonas Hamill Actually no if you compare the 80's society when advertising tobacco was legal in every country, everybody smoked, EVERYBODY, because smoking was a part of the society like the cold war or liking rock music.
Here in chile advertising tobacco is illegal too, they even put images of cancerous lungs or dead people.
But in the 80's it was legal to advertise, and if you look at every single movie, documentary, tv series... etc, oriented in the 80's you'll see everybody smoking.
If the mayority of the population is leaving tobacco back since the tobacco adversiting ban , what's the logic to say that the companies are making more money.
SinNombreYQueWea Tobacco costs more and advertising costs are zero, the huge taxation of cigarettes means the price difference between brands is not so much. When cigarettes are a dollar a pack then adding an extra dollar a pack will result in loss of all your customers. When they cost twenty five dollars the extra dollar a packet going to the bottom libe is not worth considering.
+Jonas Hamill Yea, especially if you use stats like "11/10 doctors administer cigarettes". That's what Red Strikes did in the video!
The prisoner’s dilemma is something I discovered through the game Zero Escape: Virtue’s Last Reward. I loved how that game twisted this already pretty messed up system into something that was horrifying to try and get through.
Came here to find this comment 😂 did you finish the game ? Sigmas fate was crazy.
The answer? Sue the police for corruption!
HandsomeMGTOW how is it corruption
It's corruption since the police is making them agree to a harder crime without having evidence of a harder crime. They only did a lesser crime(misdemeanor) and didn't commit a harder crime(felony). Since the crime was lesser, the police is essentially manipulating them into saying that the other did a harder crime. It's a trap! Lawyer up! Don't let them play these social psychopathic sociopath mind games on you. The sociopathic psychopath globalist elites want to ruin everything!
HandsomeMGTOW thats rareley what plea bargaining is used for
HandsomeMGTOW its getting people to confess to crimes or testify against someone else who did a larger crime in exchange for something like there lesser crime being ignored. Its used to get the small time criminals to help cops catch the bugger ones
Bigger*
Best option: Shut up and get a lawyer. Spend no time in prison
I know this comment is old, but:
if the evidence for the minor crime (let's say fingerprints on a stolen item) is presented in court, you'll still get an year in prison.
John Doe you could still spend one year for the small crime
Ace attorney.
Not entirely sure why this video was suggested to me, but I'm glad it was! Awesome stuff!
Same it was suggested to me don't know why but I'm also glad it was
i think its when video gets so many likes it gets more popular so youtube recommends it thats why its only now that we are getting these recommmendations
Same here
I've subscribed now
Same bro welcome to the family
This reminds me of “The evolution of trust”
Great application/ example at 2:00
The advertising made it clearer why this is important.
"they were supposed to be cute" lol that's what my mom said
EYYYYYY! wait wut!
Rip
AN I OOP-
Jesus damn
No
If they are Black, they are both going to jail for 5 years.
+Phoenixspin cruel but true
***** no it's not, it is just a fact.
*****
Well, if you say that 70% of gamers are boys, is it racist? No. Because it is a fact.
And this is fact, not joke, although the fact itself is funny.
…Assuming they survive the police's gunshots before getting arrested.
+Luka DS It could also suggest other problems, depending on the justness and bias of the justice system.
genius artistic visualisation. I like the simplicity and clarity of your illustration.
I was scared half to death when their faces turned into creepy pixel smiles
The game show Golden Balls (UK) uses this in the final part of the show where the two remaining contestants can either choose split the money or steal it, if one steals the other splits stealer gets all but if both steal no one gets anything, however they are allowed to talk so it is more about trusting the other person to do the right thing and not be greedy.
keep it; I'm an asshole
Was just thinking about this when I was watching it. Think I might go with "steal" anyway, not necessarily because I wouldn't split afterwards (just give them a check after the show ends), but because I don't want some greedy person stealing all the money with no intention of giving it to me.
Did you see that woman who stole the £100,00 and the other guy wanted to split. What a bitch.
Pretty much everyone always steals on this show, it's kinda hilarious, I'm not sure I've ever seen both players split...
Used to be a similar game show here in the states called Friend or Foe. Was one of my favorite shows not sure why the stopped making them.
Two rival nations wanting to reduce their number of nukes to please their citizens. Another example.
I remember DanganRonpa using that example too when describing it.
(but Virtue's Last Reward explained it the best).
also they're expensive. Having 2 times more nukes won't make others fear you twice as much. In times of peace, the bluff is all they're good for
Both can reduce the nukes to please their 80% of both countries' citizens, one can choose not to reduce nukes and please only 65% of their population while the other who pleases 95%, or both can not reduce any nukes can please only 50% of both countries' citizens
701468392523816070046289411368222507496286869371438642749038614
J
This video made understanding the Prisoner’s Dilemma very easy to understand - thank you for your time spent creating and publishing this great content! 😊
Protip:
The true lesson of this situation is that, no matter what, talking to the police is a bad idea. Be smart. It doesn't matter how innocent you are. Lawyer up.
no it's not
@@Liam_The_Great
It 100% is.
It's not the lesson the Dilemma wants us to take, but it is the lesson you should take from it. Remember. The police do not work to help you, but to prevent and punish crime. There's a deep fundamental difference.
Lawyer up my friend. False convictions happen all the time on the Western world.
also it's kind of BS that accusation from some criminal would somehow be sufficient proof to get you in trouble. Like in this hypothetical situation they could both be innocent and both end up punished wtf?
@@teranyan
Happens all the time, my dude.
That's why you follow the cardinal rule and never talk to the police. Lawyer up.
5:29 What did i just witness
Jehova
Murders
The faces of the devil's advocate.
The channel losing one subscriber because this comment had a timestamp I could click on.
It’s not _that_ creepy, now do be a dear and kill the bastard who made the comment.
I watched it now get out of my suggestions.
+Daniel Silva No. You watch it again.
Touche, I won't deny it I liked the video just that it was kind of annoying it being on my suggestion, good job though/
Wolfhair I have
+Daniel Silva and again,AND AGAIN MUAHAHAHAHA (actually,you can delete video off the suggestion.Google it how :D )
lightningstrike2001 Nah I'm alright lol, I'll watch it when I'm bored.
Been teaching pd for many years. This is still the best video on the topic - so thank you very much!
ok but wtf are those cigarettes?
"start early"
"made for a woman"
ah, yes
children smoking and sexism
They are real ads from the 1950s
shut uo
@@luzlyl2807 uo
@@luzlyl2807 uo
@@dimamatat5548 oh.
I think the real dilemma here is why their faces don't connect with their body
It's because they don't smoke lucky strike
Magnets. If you don't know the answer, it's usually magnets.
*r a y m a n i n t e n s i f i e s*
They are from the same species as Rayman
😂😂😂
Dat last scene tho, scared the bleach out of me
I see u everywhere xD
I can't believe I am saying this, but I hid behind my jumper I have on my lap XD!
Why are you literally everywhere? Like Wtf
nice name u hav
nice statement though
That experiment was interesting for the fact so many people cooperated...I'd like to see a meta study done on this experiment by running it on multiple sessions with the only variable being the stakes on which the point system depends on higher stakes and pressure on the person the change in the cooperation and defection rate should be interesting to observe.
Phi taught me this from Zero Escape.
Good thing Dio isn't here, otherwise he'd be betraying me every chance he gets.
Goddamn it, Dio.
Jotaroooooooo
@@mahmirr go fucking away with this cancer called "jjba". this comment is about normal game, not stupid anime
no
@@stasgrach Dude, don't be rude.
@Fanjanhong * hey, so umm... just wanted to say... that, ahhhhh hatingjojoisajojoreference
Zero escape: virtues last reward is all about this lol
phew, i thought i was the only one thinking that, since no-one else commented that. haha, the only thing in my mind was "it HAS to be Zero's Escape: Virtue's Last Reward"
AggronTrainer ポケットモンスター lol yeah
The zero escape series is great
+Not_a_psychopath I love the series it's really good.
Yeah, have you played the newest game? Zero is voiced by the guy who voices Albert Wesker from resident evil.
If you can't trust your partner to do the option that is best for you both of you then you need a new partner.
amen.
If only that could work
You've been captured in Prison and you can't actually Have a new partner..
Because arsonists are known for being trustworthy
@@TheKYLEdavid "But we pinky promised"
"ah yes, thieves are known for keeping their pinky promises"
-studio c, practical philosophy
This reminds me of an episode I believe was called prisoners dilemma on a show called white collar. The good guys managed to make the bad guys think that the other was betraying them
I remember this! There's this place called The Explortorium in SF that has these two rooms where you do this same exact thing.
so, moral of the story, cooperation is key to success.
if we all lived by the teachings of these results then there would be no war
It's just a scenerio... Real life isn't like this
+SoldierCyfix the moral is that our judical system is a fraud and needs fixing
Can you elaborate more on this proposed "fifth rule"?
+SoldierCyfix the thing is old wars were conquests where you knew you would win and modern wars are fought by religious radicals and blind xenophobes.
+SoldierCyfix In fact, the story is the opposite of what your saying. GTO in here says you have to protect yourself not your friend.
Lol, Virtue's Last Reward taught me this.
Golden balls taught me this.
true
Same
Phi and Apple and Bannana
Fuck Dio.
I've watched like 10 videos to understand the Nash Equilibrium and yours was the only one that did the trick...Respect!
This made an appearance in the book series, “The Mysterious Benedict Society”
If you own a 3DS or Vita and like this video, there's a fantastic game called Zero Escape: Virtue's Last Reward that's all about the Prisoner's Dilemma. A group of nine people are forced to play a game based on alliances and betrayals. It's an amazing and thought-provoking story.
TheKiss Have the game and love it! Finished all the stories, but most of the time, choosing whether to ally or betray was difficult.
My uncle is currently in jail, I should mail him about this so he can get out of jail.....
What....
+TheMistakenGoomba lmao 😂
+CaptBackwards how does that even work? :o :p
OpenIt with magic...
lmaooo
My teacher in high school did this game, she put us in random pairs and the rules were the same. But my partner betrayed me
oof
But there were no stakes, were there?
@@hackerulroman nope thank god lol
@@janabroflovski2572 disappointing, probably for hs a great wager would be homework. That should be enough motive
@@hackerulroman it was just a fun test to see who will betray or not
Team Rocket finally landed in prison?
Ash: NO EVIDENCE?!
XD
Pikachu: "Finally, After 3000 Years"
I'm the type of person who would always go for cooperate, but then always be betrayed *coughzeroescapecough*
*sigh* happened to me so many times
Same :(. The best option is to betray if you think the other person will betray, but cooperate if.you think they will cooperate.
hi.lol
test.o.o
I'm a copycat. I would do anything you did to me in the last round. But at first, I would cooperate. :D
I mean if you commit a crime, what you should know about cops is that if they know shit about what you did, they wont be interrogating you.
Be smart, people. Keep your mouth shut and don't ever talk to cops.
Dakota M What is law is not always what is right.
***** Never trust police either. Police wants to put someone in prison, sometimes regardless if person committed the crime. Especially in set ups, all system wants is someone to punish for laws being broken. Basically, never go along with the system and never cooperate.
Stefan Kojadinov : true in fact not many people know defence attys will tell you don't Ever talk to the cops. You don't have to. You have the right to remain silent! Insist on waiting for public defender in you have no money.
***** so just remain silent on all questions?
Ekinlabberer That's the best thing, yeah. They'll call it not cooperating but that's a fucking lie, and they know it. Just ask for a lawyer, then stay completely silent until he shows up. Look to your lawyer every time they ask you a question to see if it's alright to answer.
Police interrogation uses pressure to get you to confess to shit you likely haven't done. Stay calm and remember that you're innocent until the judge rules guilty, regardless of what you have or haven't done.
The Prisoner's Dilemma is also known as Split or Steal and is used as the endgame of some gameshows.
The Nonary Game: Ambidex edition from Zero Escape: Virtue's Last Reward uses this (it even explains it in full detail at some point) so that characters can get points to get out of the complex they're in. The scores are like this:
All start with 3 points (if they get 9, they are allowed to leave, but that will leave anyone who doesn't go with them trapped forever) and are either paired with someone else or go alone depending on their bracelets' color and whether it says "pair" or "solo" but the prisoner part comes like this: They are paired with the group they went with to a room (The Puzzle part of Zero Escape) and they have to choose either Ally or Betrayal. The scorings go like this:
Ally/Ally: +2/+2
Ally/Betray: -2/+3
Betray/Betray: 0/0
What's interesting is that people who get to 6 points will coerce others into picking ally to betray them and escape ASAP instead of contributing into picking ally altogether since the beginning.
The real answer is to become John cena break through the wall and rescue ur friend and run away
Supreme Wolf MT IKR that is insane
Yeah, like why was that not one of the options? What is wrong with this thing becuase that’s the most likely answer...
Finally someone wih a brain..
John Cena Hands
That is correct
the end really spooked me
Reddit is about to make the biggest Prisoner's Dillema experiment ever.
I know it's been 2+ years...but mind explaining? 🥺
@@joelabraham2538 same
Where did you get the results from the study mentioned?
It gets especially troubling if both prisoners are innocent. If all the police want is a confession and they'll take a fake one, the odds are stacked heavily against the truth -- the advantage is always to snitch even if you're making it up, and staying honest becomes a frightening risk. I would hope that defendants are not placed in prisoner's dilemmas for that very reason, but I get the impression it does happen. The McCarthy trials hinged on this concept, and I don't think we've fully learned from that.
Wasn't Aaron Swartz also placed in a similar situation like this one?
Misclickable I don't know. I just now tried looking for info on that on the wikipedia page but didn't notice anything. Let me know if you find anything, that could be an interesting read.
Daniel Hale I believe I heard it being mentioned in a video on CZcams. I believe it was criticizing the prosecution of Aaron Swartz.
Hmm... that would be hard to track down. That's too bad -- let me know if you find an article on it or something. Thanks!
It's a different layer of the narrative used to back the mathematical model, that is not present here, this omission occurred by choice I suppose, in order to keep it simple, but your remark is still valid.
I was a test subject in one of those computer-tests, facing off against another anonymous person. Twice actually. I always tried to co-operate. First time the other person came along after a few rounds, but the person in the second trial didn't :/ . I felt like shouting "Betrayal!", although ofcourse nothing was agreed beforehand.
Timo Vehviläinen lol
+This Place Did you know Prisoners Dilemma is the main game mechanic in the game Zero Escape: Virtue's Last Reward?
Never heard of that game. How do they make that a main game mechanic?
+Timo Vehviläinen in this experiment no one has anything to lose or gain. people might react differently in real life situations. for example in the prison one. another great way to experiment this would be do this competition in collaboration with some online addictive game like clash of clans and then they can gain or lose coins depending on their choices
+Sanil Khurana Well, there's another parameter in RL, that isn't modelled by this test. Suppose blue goes to jail and red goes free. After three years, blue might find red and kill her. Or, in case they were a part of some criminal organization, it might not even take three years for red to meet her demise. In RL betrayal isn't really a rewarded property.
Very nice succinct and clear explanation of this concept..Loved it .!👍
i needed this for the confirmation of me getting this certain part of economics and even though im dutch your explanation was spot on... thank you!:D
So it's kind of like the boat thing from The Dark Knight?
A libertarian yeah... kinda
Yeah but Joker won't arrest them both if neither choose to betray the other.
Somewhat.
Yes, but that was a much more psychological dilemma. Do you want to be alive, a murderer, or dead? Obviously the logical answer is alive, but can you live with yourself if you're a murderer? Then there's the fact that it was the Joker. There was no certainty that any of it was true. The decision was actually up to him, not the "prisoners," until Batman intervened.
A similar type of situation, yes.
You guys need to play Virtue's Last Reward. That game has this dilemma ALL over it!
I was just about to put that virtue's last reward is awesome
Ally or betray. Also fuck Dio
sup Hoelds SCREW YOU DIO!!!
Dio da?
I knew what I meant due to Zero escape, but your video really helped my explaining it to others.
My thanks, dear friend past the wild, blue waves.
This is real life thing especially in territory management aspects of sales , where in order to stop wastage of resources over hiring and marketing, companies with almost identical offerings simply demarcate territories to save resources and gain money in their respective areas
Well Zero Escape brought me here, and now I have a deeper understanding.
This is why you never talk to the police... You wait for a lawyer and neither go to prison.
Yes
@Mike G I ain't robbing a bank by myself wtf
"here is a real world situation" proceeds to basically say that advertising doesn't work. Loved the video keep it up
I discovered this channel Yesterday, loved it, subscribed and just now found out that he hastnt uploaded in a year...
Fml
Snitches get stitches
Snitches lose riches
Snitches are bitches
Snitches get snitches get stitches get snitches stitches
+Dhruvik Nanavati But if snitches get stiches, and bitches dig stiches, then snitches DO get bitches
Snitches end in ditches
+Female Scout Snitch...a word made up by people that have wronged others and are now afraid of the punishment that awaits them...it's not snitches that are bitches, it's the ones that did the crime in the first place...get it right!!!
The cigarette adverts themselves are hilarious! Can't think they're too far from the truth as back in the day smoking was seen as healthy.
Future Proof ha... yeah. That red ad was from a soda ad that had basically the same text, "use soda for early formative benefits" or something like that. The other was a ketchup bottle "that even women could open" and she was so happy because they finally made a bottle for the weaker sex.
This Place
lol
Future Proof known fact that smoking industry profits went up when smoking was banned for this exact reason.
Future Proof I remember the good ol' days when smoking wasn't dangerous.... Good ol' times indeed... ;)
Yijuwarp so did the gov
Thanks for the explanation. This was really helpful.
Dose this still work if get all the winnings if one person defects and another cooperates
Now I need to go play Zero Escape again.....
I was starting to think no one else would have came here
I literally bought that game today. ahahah
Third game is coming out this year. The best time to replay!
Super excited!!
Omg I found my fandom. Aren't you guys excited about the third game coming out soon?
Considering the punishment for BOTH of you talking is 2 years, as opposed to 1 year if both of you stayed silent, it makes the most sense to talk. The 1 year option is there only to trick you as there are better odds if you talk. Your partner might not talk and you get out right away, or you both talk and get out in 2 years. If you chose to stay silent you're running the risk of 3 years in prison thus putting yourself on high risk. If each amount of years was a different tier it would look as follows:
Tier 1 - 0 years
Tier 2 - 1 year
Tier 3 - 2 years
Tier 4 - 3 years
By choosing to talk, you combine tiers 1 and 3 to create a net year length of 2.
If you were to stay silent, you're combining tiers 2 and 4, to create a net year length of 4
Statistically it makes much more sense to talk because it has the lowest possible net amount of years, AND you have a chance to get out in 0 years, as opposed to doubling your net years and playing the odds by running the chance to get out in 3.
well I guess it depends on how much you care about the other person.
The first time I heard of this dilema, the situation is with your best friend
This comment is 2 iq. You've restated something already mentioned in the video.
For me the most important factor is whether I actually committed those worse crimes. If I did, I definitely wouldn't blame my partner. I wouldnt be able to live with myself like that. But I also wouldnt be able to confess so I'd rather just stay silent. Even if my partner betrayed me, I would be serving what I deserved anyways and he would've just done what I was too scared to do. If I didnt commit the crime however, I'd also stay silent because accusing someone of a crime he didnt do isnt any better. I feel like people just think of this in terms of numbers but this is also a test of morality. How would you be able to live with yourself if you accuse someone of a crime falsely? And ruin their lives like that?
But nvm me, I dont think I'd be able to defect in another situation either. Im too nice. The rewards in a prisoner's dilemma situation just dont trump having to lose the other's trust and have them hate me.
The real dilemma in this is that since both of you talking ends in both of you serving two years, it would be better even for the individual to stay silent. What is being demonstrated by the dilemma is that people can end up worse off by picking the options that would make them better off.
Sollution to this
1. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime
2. Snitches gets stiches.
3. ???
4. Profit.
There's a game called "The Evolution of Trust" and it's very similar to this
But it's not the same because rationally if you both defect, in that game, you bother get nothing. There is no gain
Okay here is another one. You and a stranger are walking down a sidewalk. You are walking behind the stranger when you see him drop a $100 bill. You can pick it up and keep it or you can pick it up and return it to him. The stranger will never know you picked up his money, it will just be gone the next time he looks for it.
What would you do. Will you be honest and give it back to him, or will you keep it for yourself.
You know nothing about the stranger or why he is careless with money. The money might be all he has to feed himself for a month, or he might have just stolen it from his grandmother.
Would your choice be influenced by the amount of money? Would you choose differently if it was a $5 bill instead?
I would prob give it back anyway. :(
Diana Lucas
I HAVE given it back, more than once. It annoys me a little when they are surprised by my honesty.
Most people like to think they are "normal" meaning most other people are like they are. I think if they are surprised it means they would not have done the same.
I even saw a really drunk guy once, trying to buy a BART ticket. He had several $100 bills but the machine doesn't except that denomination.
I told him to put his money away before he got mugged, then pulled out my wallet to buy the idiot a ticket. My intention was to get him home, maybe call his wife or a friend to drive him, but he leaned over and said, "I'm not drunk, I'm a cop. Thanks, but please go away."
I realized it was a sting and I'd just fucked it up...
HA! LOL!! Soz, but still. Lol. Lucky you. I wonder what the main goal was....but whatev. It's prob private.
If I didn't know whose money it was, I would donate it either to a homeless person or a charity (a dollar goes a long way). Or I'd use it to buy more wool or something so I could use it to make a blanket/quilt for a homeless person, or a beanie for a baby orphan.
Diana Lucas
Well clearly in this example you DO know who the money belongs to. You saw the person drop it.
If you don't know who the money belongs to, and you can't find out, then it's yours to keep as far as I'm concerned.
Exactly. :)
This reminds me of women and makeup. I consider beauty to be relative. Makeup just ups the beauty standards. Nothing is gained when all women use makeup, which most of them do. They just waste their time, but they do it to be prettier than those OTHER women. The few who refuse to waste their time with such things are "betrayed" and look worse in comparison to the others.
(And don't get me started with the "natural" look and "no makeup". Yes, men would PREFER it if a woman looked that way without makeup. But it's been proven that makeup can fool men into thinking a woman is more beautiful than she is, especially when he can't notice she's wearing it.)
WTF you're bringing up an unrelated subject. And women who choose to not wear makeup don't feel betrayed in any way lol
If you want men to sleep with you then yes wear makeup, if you want relationship, appearance doesn't really matter.
+Schnappi fckingcrocodile Unless you are very ugly, I don't really think you need make-up to sleep with men.
+Lady Lamb PERFECT, I needed an example of Prisoner's dilemma and I re watched the video for ideas. All I did was scroll down a bit and now you just helped me with my homework! Since I'm a guy, it would be weird if I said women so I'm going to change it to "People who use makeup/People who don't use makeup" for my diagram.
I watched primer's video on aggression and they briefly talked about this.
Dove and Hawk
@@Win090949 yes that one
Reminds me of the ending to that Futurama episode where Bender and Fry both accidentally kill a guy. Then it says on the news that if one of the culprits turns the other in they'll get to walk free with a reward.
I know the cigarette example is supposed to be kept simple but it should be pointed out that the scenario where both companies decide to advertise is flawed. It assumes that both companies will perform equally well at the task. When you decide to compete instead of cooperate you are basing your decision on the hope that your superior skills will allow you to be superior to the competition and that you will reap more reward than if you cooperate.
To me it seems that because we all have different strengths, competition will usually produce the best results where as cooperation will often lead to cartel like situations with stagnation and a worse outcome for the majority.
Pat121V I just did the advertising example because I think cigarette ads are very very funny
Pat121V is comedy gold
This Place I've just been watching a few more of your videos. They are awesome. I love this style of explanations. Tragedy of the commons is my favourite so far. Tobacco advertising is banned where i'm from and they are even introducing plain packaging rules.
Pat121V There is no flaw... he gave the examples and said what each company would make from advertising.. do you know the difference between ''hypothetical'' and ''real life situations''? Your IQ must be 70.
Ana Costellano Woah testy. Chill and i'll explain why you're wrong .
The hypothetical situation is being used to illustrate benefits of real world actions ie cooperation versus competition. It ignores the possibility of one company outperforming the other through competition thereby maximizing its own reward. I believe this is explaining something called game theory. It comes to the conclusion that it is in both companies interest to cooperate. The analysis is correct for the scenario parameters. However, as it makes no mention of the competitors ability, the scenario is flawed in it's relevance to real world actions.
I really hope your channel gets big. you do an amazing job!
I know there is a game/experiment about this theory on the internet and I forgot what it’s called. Does anybody know what this game is called?
me: aw shit my favorite tv show drama thats sponsored by red strikes and smooth blue is about to start
0:03 previously on THE NO NECKS
Red shouldn't worry too much, the criminal justice system is much more lenient on females. They'll probably pin the whole thing on blue anyway.
Your comment made me lol for some reason :')
5:31 *YOU DID NOT HAVE TO PUT BLOOD! I'M WATCHING THIS AT NIGHTTIME!*
-R.i.p me-
Hieu Le same lol. Was not expecting that.
The best real world case of this game theory for me is in the old British gameshow with Jasper Carrott called Golden Balls. When the one guy tricks his opponent by saying he’s going to steal their money and then he doesn’t and they both get the best possible outcome with shared winnings. Look it up
2 of my lecturers explained this but didnt mention prisioner's once, got really confused when the handbook said i needed to know the prisioner's dilemma
Did anyone else hear this theory for the first time in Zero Escape?
"these are creepier than they were in my head" XD
What you do is stay honest, so you can find/preserve honest people. That's more important than whatever advantage/escape you could get. Because if the world runs out of honest people, it's over.
thank u sir thanks alot this topic fly above my mind but after watching your vedio it is clear thank u.
I was watching funny cat videos...now its 1:30 AM and im here. What happened?!
I have played enough Zero Escape to know where this is going.
I was literally looking through the comments to see if anyone here has played Zero Escape XD
+calebjedimaster Lmao. Ready for Zero Time Dilemma?
Oh yeah, it's going to be awesome! Only a couple more days.
Fuck yes
Dio is the perfect example of a rational agent and I hate it. Well, unless he's playing Luna, that is.
I remember seeing this video five years ago and not getting the point of it, and only now am I getting how brilliant this is.
Better example would be the mall I work at. We have 4 clothing stores that all market to teens and young adults and every big sale day (black friday, back to school, boxing day) they have the exact same sales because in the end co-operating mutually benefits everyone more than one store going 70% off when the others go 50%.