Game Theory Take On - Washington’s Rogue Elephants
1–10 of 60 posts
Re: Game Theory Take On - Washington’s Rogue Elephants
#2I thought this was an interesting article as it's more analysis than it is political commentary, something the hacker news community could enjoy from an analytical perspective.
Re: Game Theory Take On - Washington’s Rogue Elephants
#3The article's pretty short on analyzing what game best models the current debates. My vote would be for the ultimatum game, but that ignores the element of time in their decisions. Time is a huge factor in this game, so it probably isn't even that great of a model.
Wikipedia has a pretty comprehensive list here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_in_game_theory
Re: Game Theory Take On - Washington’s Rogue Elephants
#4So how could he stop playing the game? Simply give up on raising the debt ceiling?
That doesn't seem like it would give a good outcome.
Re: Game Theory Take On - Washington’s Rogue Elephants
#5The article's pretty short on analyzing what game best models the current debates. My vote would be for the ultimatum game, but that ignores the element of time in their decisions. Time is a huge factor in this game, so it probably isn't even that great of a model. Wikipedia has a pretty comprehensive list here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_in_game_theory
The author makes several comparisons with the game of chicken
Re: Game Theory Take On - Washington’s Rogue Elephants
#6I thought this was an interesting article as it's more analysis than it is political commentary, something the hacker news community could enjoy from an analytical perspective.
This article is a pseduo-analytical wrapper around an extremely partisian stance: My political opponents are irrational idiots (literally mad elephants), having purposely made themselves incapable of rational cooperation. Therefore, I will take the high road as the morally upright and rational person I am.
The key thing about the game of chicken is that it is symmetric. And, in fact, the current budget debate is more-or-less so: both the president and the house republicans must agree; it either rejects the deal, there is a terrible consequence for everyone. (It's possible, of course, to argue that one side will come out worse, to break the symmetry, but the article makes no attempt to justify such a claim.) Declaring one side crazy and the other side righteous is hardly analysis.
Re: Game Theory Take On - Washington’s Rogue Elephants
#7This is an interesting article, but the game isn't chicken, what is happening in Washington is a dance of distraction. Most of the damage to the economy is already done, the public is just waiting for the "leadership" to finally drive the rotting ship into the iceberg. No matter how much the rational and historically educated among us yell "The emperor has no clothes", we are powerless against the interests that have dominated over the last thirty years.
Re: Game Theory Take On - Washington’s Rogue Elephants
#8I thought this was an interesting article as it's more analysis than it is political commentary, something the hacker news community could enjoy from an analytical perspective.
This article is a pseduo-analytical wrapper around an extremely partisian stance: My political opponents are irrational idiots (literally mad elephants ), having purposely made themselves incapable of rational cooperation. Therefore, I will take the high road as the morally upright and rational person I am. The key thing about the game of chicken is that it is symmetric. And, in fact, the current budget debate is mor…
"Literally" mad elephants? ;)
http://xkcd.com/725/
Re: Game Theory Take On - Washington’s Rogue Elephants
#9So how could he stop playing the game? Simply give up on raising the debt ceiling? That doesn't seem like it would give a good outcome.
It would be terrible in the short run, but it would be vastly better in the long run. Presently, the US is on the unsustainable trajectory of acquiring debt until it defaults. Not raising the debt ceiling would immediately end this problem. Is it better to have a smaller catastrophe now, or a bigger catastrophe later?
Re: Game Theory Take On - Washington’s Rogue Elephants
#10Good article - up until the point where he claims the Republicans are the "rogue elephants". To the other side the Democrats are the "rogue elephants", and it's interesting that the author appears incapable of seeing that.
A truly irrational person is a rare thing. If you are unable to explain the actions of your opponent in any other way then the fault lies within you, not them.