Wondering if it's better than the Coursera class with Stanford and University of British Columbia professors. https://www.coursera.org/learn/game-theory-1
I just started taking that course last night from Coursera.
Game Theory (2007)
21–30 of 45 posts
Re: Game Theory (2007)
#22Is there any real world usage of game theory for ordinary people?
You may consider the Cold War a real world usage for ordinary people:
https://blogs.cornell.edu/info2040/2016/09/09/mutually-assur...
Re: Game Theory (2007)
#23To see Game Theory from a 'cooperation' point of view, check out the landmark book, The Evolution of Cooperation[1] by Robert Axelrod.
Axelrod's work was also summarized in The Selfish Gene. (And more recently, in Behave, by Sapolsky.)
From the abstract:
"We assume that, in a world ruled by natural selection, selfishness pays. So why cooperate? In The Evolution of Cooperation, political scientist Robert Axelrod seeks to answer this question. In 1980, he organized the famed Computer Prisoners Dilemma Tournament, which sought to find the optimal strategy for survival in a particular game. Over and over, the simplest strategy, a cooperative program called Tit for Tat, shut out the competition. In other words, cooperation, not unfettered competition, turns out to be our best chance for survival."
[1] https://www.basicbooks.com/titles/robert-axelrod/the-evoluti...
Re: Game Theory (2007)
#24Is there any real world usage of game theory for ordinary people?
[deleted]
Re: Game Theory (2007)
#25Is there any real world usage of game theory for ordinary people?
Lots of specific comments below. My experience was that game theory changed the way I think about almost any aspect of life, by giving me a set of simple tools. It's not the only toolkit you should have, but it's very powerful. "This is a coordination game; this is signalling; that is a prisoner's dilemma..." turns out to be a very useful vocabulary for thinking about situations, from everyday life up to superpower conflict.
For a great introduction from this point of view, check out Thomas Schelling's Strategy of Conflict. No maths, just a great read from a Nobel prize winner.
Re: Game Theory (2007)
#26Off topic but there is also a course there on Financial Markets by Robert Schiller of the Case Schiller Index that I found very interesting. https://oyc.yale.edu/economics/econ-252-11/lecture-1
Schiller postponed his Narrative Economics mooc last year, regretfully
Re: Game Theory (2007)
#27Re: Game Theory (2007)
#28Is there any real world usage of game theory for ordinary people?
Yes! Very much! I took a course of evolutionary game theory, which opened up my eyes and changed the way I think. So much that I'd recommend (evolutionary) game theory for everyone. It's relevant in every day life: human interaction often fits the schema of the prisoner's dilemma, the signalling game or the chicken game. That tit-for-tat is the optimal strategy in iterated prisoner's dilemmata matches intuition about…
> That tit-for-tat is the optimal strategy in iterated prisoner's dilemmata matches intuition about human cooperation.
It certainly doesn't match my intuition because it's a quite mechanistic view of things. But speaking in mathematical terms, I have the suspicion that it's a solution for a very specific situation that generalizes with negative side-effects to social life. In any case, I've read that governments use this strategy when it comes to foreign affairs.
Re: Game Theory (2007)
#29Is there any real world usage of game theory for ordinary people?
Adam Grant's Give and Take is a good layman application of game theory to interpersonal relationships. Tit for tat would be called the 'matchers'
Re: Game Theory (2007)
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes! Very much! I took a course of evolutionary game theory, which opened up my eyes and changed the way I think. So much that I'd recommend (evolutionary) game theory for everyone. It's relevant in every day life: human interaction often fits the schema of the prisoner's dilemma, the signalling game or the chicken game. That tit-for-tat is the optimal strategy in iterated prisoner's dilemmata matches intuition about…
> That tit-for-tat is the optimal strategy in iterated prisoner's dilemmata matches intuition about human cooperation. It certainly doesn't match my intuition because it's a quite mechanistic view of things. But speaking in mathematical terms, I have the suspicion that it's a solution for a very specific situation that generalizes with negative side-effects to social life. In any case, I've read that governments use…
Well, intuitions can sometimes be completely off. But of course, tit-for-tat is just a general strategy it doesn't mean that you have to apply it blindly, without e.g. tuning the parameters. And, as far as I can remember, there are slightly modified formalized versions, where you allow for the other party cheating/competing without immediate retortion.
The idea is, that of course, in real life people are not 100% uniform, miscommunication and misunderstanding happens, etc. And you'll want to tune your parameters to the situation at hand. E.g. if you have a long standing relationship with the other actor and they've always been cooperating then you may not want to compete/retort when you see then doing it for the first time. (OTOH, what I personally found important is that in a new relationship, you should be very strict about this. Even if not immediately compete, shoot a very directed and serious warning.)
The general idea is that you don't let the other party to take advantage of you in the long run , but you always allow for de-escalation and don't try to take advantage of them in the long run either. (You will get taken advantage of, of course, because you'll always start cooperating, so if every other actor/player is competing then you'll lose on average. But not by much. However, if there are just a few one who are willing to cooperate most of the time, then you'll win big time.)