From b2b46a5590d95f27857144b848929bfa3fae79b1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nicky Case
During World War I, peace broke out.
@@ -96,7 +100,7 @@ Wow, that's mean... and also the correct answer!
-Sure, seems like the right thing to do... or is it?
+Sure, seems like the right thing to do... OR IS IT??
@@ -289,7 +293,7 @@ Congrats, you placed your bet on the right horse.
Copycat goes by many names.
-The Golden Rule, reciprocal altruism, tit for tat, or... live and let live.
+The Golden Rule, reciprocal altruism, tit for tat, or... live and let live.
That's why "peace" could emerge in the trenches of World War I:
when you're forced to play the same game with the
same specific people (not just the same generic "enemy") over and over again --
@@ -476,8 +480,9 @@ However...
There are jerks. Look around.
+Before everything goes to heck: let's start with something nice.
+A world, mostly populated by nice Copycats,
+with only one each of a
+mean Always Cheat,
+naive Always Cooperate,
+unforgiving Grudger, and
+manipulative Detective.
+
+Under our current rules, Copycat wins easily.
+
+(when you're done, press:)
+
+As you just saw, if you play enough rounds, Copycat still wins...
+but when people play with each other less and less... suddenly, // HOW MUCH?
+ALWAYS CHEAT dominates once again.
+
+oh, it gets worse... →
+
+There's another way to breed distrust.
+Here are the "payoffs" for a single round of the trust game:
+
+Note: although the reward for mutual trust (+2) is less than the temptation to exploit (+3),
+with enough repeat interaction, trust can still win!
+But now, click the arrows above to change the reward from +2 to +1,
+then click "start".
+Even though +1 is still more than the punishment for mutual distrust (0)...
+what happens?
+
+(simulating: 5 rounds per match)
+
+So even if the reward for getting a "win-win" is still more
+than the punishment for a "lose-lose"...
+if the reward for mutual trust is too low, distrust evolves.
+
+...whatevs i dunno →
+
+Aaaaanyway, you can now play with both the number of rounds and the payoffs!
+These two things interact with each other a lot.
+For example, even though a low +1 reward creates distrust with 5 rounds per match,
+trust can still win with 10 rounds per match! (Click START to simulate this)
+
+Once you're done experimenting,
+(and there'll be a much bigger "sandbox" to play around with at the end)
+let's take a look at our final, most interesting barrier to trust...
+
+
+As cool as Copycat is, it has a huge, fatal weakness I haven't mentioned yet.
+To understand it, let's imagine two Copycats are playing against each other:
+
+Being a nice player, both their first moves will be:
+
+And normally, they'd just pay back each others' kindness and sing Kumbaya 'til the end of days.
+
+But what if, while trying to reciprocate...
+
+OH NO
+
+But if the other person doesn't think it was an accident...
+
+OH NO x2
+
+...and you, being a Copycat as well, will also have to retaliate...
+
+And like the Hatfields and McCoys, or the Crips and Bloods,
+these two Copycats will spiral into an endless feud of vengeance...
+
+...that started over a single mistake, long forgotten.
+
+...survive mistakes? →
+
+Let's meet some new faces!
+
+COPYKITTEN:
+Hello! I'm like Copycat,
+except I Cheat back only after you Cheat me twice in a row.
+After all, the first one could be a mistake! Purrrrr
+
+SIMPLETON:
+hi i try start cooperate. (unless i make mistake)
+if you cooperate back => good thing => i do same thing as last move. (even if it was mistake)
+if you cheat back => bad thing => i do opposite thing as last move. (even if it was mistake)
+
+RANDOM:
+Monkey robot! Ninja pizza tacos! lol i'm so random
+(Just plays Cheat or Cooperate randomly with a 50/50 chance)
+
+Alright, let's see how well these peeps do when they...
+
+...play against each other →
+
If Copycat is the strategy in this repeated game of trust that's so powerful --
-that even soldiers in the trenches of World War I independently "evolved" a similar strategy --
-why, then, are there so many un-trusting, un-trustworthy people around?
+that even soldiers in World War I trenches independently "evolved" a similar strategy, called "live and let live" --
+why, then, are there so many un-trusting, un-trustworthy people?
+What's causing our epidemic of un-trust?
A clue's in that sentence itself. "In this repeated game of trust."
So far we've only talked about change in the players:
@@ -489,9 +494,196 @@ What could lead to...
+Use the buttons on the right to start the simulation,
+go through it step-by-step, or restart it. →
+
+But that's under our current rules, which say that
+players play against each other 10 rounds per match.
+What if players had to play 20 rounds? 5 rounds? 3 rounds? 1 round?
+Use the slider below to change this rule, start the simulation,
+and see what happens – then repeat this for as many numbers as you'd like to experiment with:
+
+In 1985, when Americans were asked how many close friends they had,
+the most common answer was "three". In 2004, the most common answer was "zero".
+Furthermore, we're also (relatively) less likely to
+get married, volunteer, go to church, join organizations, or participate in local politics.
+We're losing our "social capital".
+And as you discovered for yourself just now,
+the fewer "repeat interactions" there are, the more distrust will spread.
+
+(and no, mass media doesn't count:
+it has to be repeat two-way interactions between specific individuals.)
+
+(after you try that, feel free to play around with different "payoff" combinations!
+once you're done experimenting, hit:)
+
+I think, as a culture, we're losing the value of finding "win-wins".
+We're more interested in "win-lose", because viciousness gets views, conflict gets clicks.
+We'd rather live and let die.
+Maybe I'm just overthinking things, maybe I'm just old and shaking my fist at a cloud...
+but don't you feel it? That we've forgotten something?...
+
+Mistakes, miscommunication, misinterpretations -- accidents happen all the time in real life.
+
+The other player, being a Copycat, had to retaliate...
+
+How tragic. But now, are there other characters, types of players, who can...
+
-...once you're done playing around in Sandbox Mode, click: +...once you're done playing around, let's recap +
++what we've learnt →
@@ -541,15 +736,43 @@ In each round of a one-on-one game, there's a [N]% chance a player makes a mista -
-blah blah blah blah
-blah blah blah blah
-blah blah blah blah
-blah blah blah blah
-blah blah blah blah
-blah blah blah blah
-blah blah blah blah
-blah blah blah blah
+
+ +TRUST: +- repeated interaction: +- win-win: +- dealing with mistakes: forgive, and try to be clear and honest yourself + +DISTRUST: +- loss of social capital +- win-lose, use versus them, zero-sum +- gleefully punishing even small mistakes + +But above all, there's also... +
++...the bigger lesson → +
+ +
+Don't hate the player, hate the game.
+
+Game theory lesson.
+
+Short term: game changes players. But don't be cynical
+
+Long term: players change game, from the bottom up -- evolution.
+
+So if we wanna cure our epidemic of distrust,
+and rebuild a trusting & trustworthy civic society, it's up to all of us.
+Let's all learn and act to find win-wins,
+to create repeated interactions,
+(and...)
+
+...to live and let live. +
- + + + + + + @@ -706,15 +934,18 @@ next →4. Repeated Tournament
++5. The Evolution of Distrust +
-5. Making Mistaeks +6. Making Mistaeks
-6. Sandbox Mode +7. Sandbox Mode
-7. Conclusion +8. Conclusion
-Credits +9. Credits