Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Non-Zero-Sum Games

nonzerosum.games

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 218 posts

Re: Non-Zero-Sum Games

#161

Post by skibidithink »

jrm4 wrote: post #156
skibidithink wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AA doesn't prevent the rich from buying admissions. It redistributes slots from middle and lower class folks with the wrong ethnicity.

I never said it did that; It pushes back against the phenomenon. The most neutral way I can put it: Every school turns away a LOT of equally qualified applicants, at some point decisions must be made. Next issue, schools don't exist purely for the benefit of the students, but the world at large. This is why you want a -- dare I say it -- diverse population. To maximize the good your students can do. Now, one may not…

You did say it.

> with slots going to the rich and privileged) [...] AA just pushes against THAT

It doesn't give away the slots reserved for the rich.

And it's not a tiebreaker between equally qualified candidates. At Harvard, Africans who performed in the 4th decile were admitted more often than Asians in the 10th decile. [1]

[1]. See page 11 (by document numbering). https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-1199/169941/202...

Re: Non-Zero-Sum Games

#162

Post by jmward01 »

elliotto wrote: post #145
jmward01 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have noticed this algorithm in many places which is why I think it is a missing piece in game theory and why formalizing it could be powerful. People use this instinctively in their interactions with others and algorithms (like the one you pointed out) have been created using the basic concept so a formalization of the math is likely in order. Consider the question of how big the offering should be. What if all par…

Yes, this is AIMD and it's well formalised and understood.

For those reading this far into the thread, here is a reference to AIMD [1]. Reading through, there is cross-over in the idea but I don't think it 100% covers things. A good starting point to look at though.

[1] https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/computer-networks/aimd-algorit...

Re: Non-Zero-Sum Games

#163

Post by Xirdus »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #158
Xirdus wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, so you indeed are doing the extremely reductionist view of economy that completely ignores services. And then calling capitalists wrong. While not even talking about the same subject as capitalists. This is lalala I can't hear you with extra steps.

I can’t believe I wasted my time thinking through that thoughtful response to you Thats on me

I'm very open to a serious discussion. But only if it's actually serious. I don't consider reducing economy to thermodynamics to be serious.

Any statement about any economy is meaningless if you're ignoring services. Especially when discussing the totality of an economic system, such as the question whether capitalism is zero-sum. I am happy to hear actual arguments how the value of services always, necessarily, by definition comes at the cost of some environment somewhere. I'm not happy to hear arguments that dismiss existence of services entirely.

I was sure you were a troll yourself after that hole digging line. My bad.

Re: Non-Zero-Sum Games

#164

Post by BeetleB »

verteu wrote: post #149
BeetleB wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Affirmative action sets up a zero-sum game where fixed resources like university admissions and employment offers are redistributed to people with the "correct" demographics. I wish I could find the source, but the vast majority of universities don't have a fixed admissions quota. They are criteria based (if you meet the criteria, you get in). In principle, AA admissions did not prevent others from getting a seat.…

CA Prop 209 is a good natural experiment: https://reappropriate.co/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Total-UC...

This tells me only about a few universities, and there are too many confounding variables.

Re: Non-Zero-Sum Games

#165

Post by skibidithink »

BeetleB wrote: post #164
verteu wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CA Prop 209 is a good natural experiment: https://reappropriate.co/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Total-UC...

This tells me only about a few universities, and there are too many confounding variables.

It's better data than the people in one person's life.

Re: Non-Zero-Sum Games

#166

Post by skibidithink »

anon84873628 wrote: post #150
skibidithink wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if some critics of AA are committing that fallacy, debunking a weaker argument when a stronger argument exists is ineffective. The implicit argument is that AA's largest challenge is a coordination problem. It's not. It's a clash in values and a fight over zero-sum rewards.

The argument is that critics of AA are committing the Fallacy of Composition. Specifically when saying that since giving out scholarships doesn't result in equal educational outcomes, then we should stop giving out scholarships. I am with the author on this one. Creating better educational outcomes (for all students) is a coordination problem.

Critics are typically saying that giving out scholarships limited by race is racially discriminatory.

Re: Non-Zero-Sum Games

#167

Post by tshaddox »

jmward01 wrote: post #118

One thing I have always thought was missing in game theory (and it is probably there but I just haven't looked hard enough) is a mathematical framework for how to build trust to increase the infinite payout for everyone. If in the decision making the idea of an offering is added in then it brings up the possibility of gauging trust and building trust so that future actions can capture more value until an optimal infi…

There's certainly academic work about game theory and reputation. Googling "reputation effects in repeated games" shows some mentions in university game theory courses. There's also loads of work about how to incentivizing actors to be truthful (e.g. when reviewing peers or products).

Signaling theory (in evolutionary biology) might also be vaguely related.

Re: Non-Zero-Sum Games

#168

Post by ls612 »

jmward01 wrote: post #118

One thing I have always thought was missing in game theory (and it is probably there but I just haven't looked hard enough) is a mathematical framework for how to build trust to increase the infinite payout for everyone. If in the decision making the idea of an offering is added in then it brings up the possibility of gauging trust and building trust so that future actions can capture more value until an optimal infi…

Economist here (but not a game theorist): Repeated games are actually really hard to find closed form equilibria for in general. Additionally, many repeated games have multiple equilibria which makes every bit of follow on analysis that much more annoying. Only very specific categories of repeated game have known nice unique solutions like you are hoping for, and even then usually only under some idealized information set structure. But as other commenters have said, this is an active area of research in Economics and many grad classes are offered on it.

Re: Non-Zero-Sum Games

#169

Post by ls612 »

BeetleB wrote: post #164
verteu wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CA Prop 209 is a good natural experiment: https://reappropriate.co/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Total-UC...

This tells me only about a few universities, and there are too many confounding variables.

But you can look at trends in other comparable states compared to California both before and after CA outlawed AA at public California universities by referendum.

Re: Non-Zero-Sum Games

#170

Post by [deleted] »

BeetleB wrote: post #164
verteu wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CA Prop 209 is a good natural experiment: https://reappropriate.co/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Total-UC...

This tells me only about a few universities, and there are too many confounding variables.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN