• m0darn@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    59 minutes ago

    I think these scenarios might be easier to analyze if we made them a bit more realistic.

    This an analogy for military intervention. If we empower our military to be proactive, we can save one "good guy"TM by killing 3 bystanders. But if NATO’s adversaries are participating too we lose 3 of our "good guy"TM

  • AWildMimicAppears@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    6 hours ago

    for the longest time, i did know that game theory did not have anything to do with “games” and that it is somehow connected to the prisoners dilemma, but the concept as such wasn’t very clear to me. If you are like my former me, take 30 minutes out of your day and visit https://ncase.me/trust/ to learn and play around with game theory; it’s a great webpage and it’s pretty good fun all around.

  • _bcron@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    7 hours ago

    The outcome from both levers pulled is so steep that it really makes no sense to pull the lever

      • _bcron@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 hours ago

        They’ll be thinking the same thing tho and if there is a greater than 20% chance of them pulling the lever it’d be worse in terms of losing family members than not pulling at all.

        But in terms of overall death, not pulling the lever is 1 or 4, and pulling the lever is 4 or 13

  • TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    The last line of these is always what the poster wants to happen

    everything else is skewed rationale to make you think it is a funny

    it is, in reality, anti-intellectual propaganda

  • wabafee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    edit-2
    11 hours ago

    Do nothing that way you don’t get to jail for murder. All the pressure goes to the other guy. Sue the railway company, guy who pulled the lever and the creator. Another is find a way not to reach to that point.

    • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 hours ago

      I feel like you’re not internalizing that this is a thought experiment.

    • fl42v@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Also, it’s too late to pull the lever, you’ll just provoke a crush.

      Lemmy Shitpost-22867873~2

  • Saledovil@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Unlike the classic prisoners dilemma, this isn’t a nash equilibrium. When I know that the other person pulls their switch, I’d improve my outcome by not pulling mine. Compare to the prisoners dilemma, where not snitching when the other side snitches earns you five years in prison.

    • UmeU@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      13 hours ago

      This was super funny, this person has a great career ahead of her. Very Tim and Eric style obscure indie comedy, I loved it.

  • Blackout@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    102
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    17 hours ago

    If these are tracks in the US then I just understaff the engineers and maintenance teams and the train derails before I have to make a decision, checkmate.

    • matlag@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 hours ago

      If these tracks are in the US, so I am. So I shoot the other guy with the gun(s) I usually carry around when I go out and then pull the lever.

  • rational_lib@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Yell to the guy on the other side that I’m going to pull the lever, so he’d better not.

    Then let it go because that both maximizes global utility and poses the lowest risk of the worst case scenario.