DayZ - Tragedy of the Commons: The Game - Extra Credits
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 июл 2024
- When resources are limited, self-interest works against itself. We see that in games like DayZ, where players could team up to fight a common threat, but the fear that someone will backstab you leads everyone to assume the worst and therefore behave as enemies.
Subscribe for more episodes every Wednesday! bit.ly/SubToEC
___________
Get your Extra Credits gear at the store! bit.ly/ExtraStore
Play games with us on Extra Play! bit.ly/WatchEXP
Watch more episodes from this season of Extra Credits! • Co-Pilot Mode - Better...
Thanks for participating in this week's discussion! We want you to be aware of our community posting guidelines so that we can have high-quality conversations: goo.gl/HkzwQh
Contribute community subtitles to Extra Credits: ruclips.net/user/timedtext_cs_p...
Talk to us on Twitter (@ExtraCreditz): bit.ly/ECTweet
Follow us on Facebook: bit.ly/ECFBPage
Get our list of recommended games on Steam: bit.ly/ECCurator
___________
Would you like James to speak at your school or organization? For info, contact us at: contact@extra-credits.net
___________
♪ Intro Music: "Penguin Cap" by CarboHydroM
bit.ly/1eIHTDS
♪ Outro Music: ““OK Desu Ka?” by an0va & GameChops
• Earthbound ~ OK DESU K... 
Игры
![CENTRAL CEE - GEN Z LUV [VERTICAL VIDEO]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VIbidJm9q34/mqdefault.jpg)
Sometimes when we fight each other for weapons, we end up shooting ourselves in the foot. What do games like Day Z teach us about ourselves, and how we can strive to be better?
Extra Credits DayZ probably wouldn't be fun without bandits, you can either fight them off or be the bandit, but both options are more fun and challenging than shooting predictable Ai.
Hmm i dont think German energy politics us a good comparison. First nuclear is phased out instead of dirty coal power plants because people got scared by decades of political fearmongering. Thus climate protection goes down the drain. And second, even worse, you have forgotten that the small energy consumer i.e. the households have to pay for the energy change in the end. Thus the energy change actually is the tragedy of the commons: everyone who had to spare some bucks invested in solar or wind energy as fast as possible to get the highest state subsidies resulting in a weakening of the grid and skyrocketing electricity costs for everybody...
Maybe do like in Metro and pay each other in bullets or some kind of common commodity that's also really valuable.
This is maybe the most inspiring video I've seen in a long time, not only for game design, but for social impact... You gave me a lot to think about....
One issue with this analogy is that DayZ is just a game, rather than a something more real that actually affects people's lives in a tangible way. There are no real consequences to screwing up other than needing to respawn, and the simple fact is that many players find the going-solo-and-killing-everyone-else approach to be more engaging than cooperating with a bunch of internet strangers, which is ultimately the most important factor.
"As long as there are two people left on the planet, someone is gonna want someone dead."
- The Sniper
That can remain true with just one person!
@@NortheastGamer Perhaps even more so.
As long as there's 2 drops of oil left on the planet, America is gonna want someone dead.
The sad truth
the sniper? there are at least 3 snipers, whomst have you of spake?
My thoughts when supermarkets started getting raided...
Explanation for those in the future: This was posted during the great toilet paper shortage of 2020.
Aka the COVID pandemic
My thoughts when capitalism
I was just thinking they shouldve reposted this lol
Mine too
God, this aged perfectly.
the raiding of the supermarkets and the mad Panic buyers send their regards
@@philip8498 raiding the capital building sends THEIR regards
@@AmazingAmatzu i mean, that isnt really related to the tragedy of the commons
I know right scary accurate
FR
8:03
remember PUBG when u need ammo but your friend says he doesn't have any and when he's dead, u loot him and sees that ammo u need like 200x bullets and he doesn't have the gun for that ammo
and you unfriend him for good
Why does this feel like it's from personal experience? XD
What really happened: How does one drop ammo? I am dumb.
Gregory Yang when you die, you drop all your stuff, and you can also drop stuff to either clear out your inventory or to give to an ally
@@rolandcaters7258 I know. What I meant was that the teammate may have been too dumb to even drop ammo.
Have you ever heard the tragedy of -darth plagueis "the wise"- the common?
ZA WARUDO! MUDAMUDA! WRYYY
Bwahahaha
It's not a story the Jedi would tell you...
Y'see, there was this one dude who could use the force to create life or som'n like...
Have you ever heard the tragedy of our lord and savior DIO?
THATS MY JOKE NI WO KUROSU NO-DA!!!
I was actually on a server for DayZ where all the clan leaders made a pact and divided up the map with the military sites and large cities as neutral. We'd check with each other before going in to make sure there was no friendly fire. We also assisted new comers to the server and earned them not to loot other player bases. If they complied they got help and maybe an invite into a clan. If they stole everyone ganged up on them and drove them off the server. If people got bored clans would arrange skirmishes. If there was an accidental fight clans leaders worked it out. It was slit if fun. The admin added in several NPC factions in large groups and upped the zombies. There was a trade post eith NPC sellers and where players coyld make trade deals and trade in a protected space and the admins played as UN peacekeepers. It was awesome. Then a RUclips got wind of the server and came in with his fan boys and wrecked the community. He ran amok until the community figured him out and then when he got his add kicked so bad he couldn't get good footage he accused the community of cheating. So the community combined to run him off. He pulled his support of the server and defamed it online. The admin shut if down.
This was of course the DayZ mod with Epoch not the crappy stand alone.
And there you've instead illuminated some other wonderful properties of humanity.
Namely how one person can wreck almost anything as long as their famous, rich or powerful enough.
would you happen to know the youtube channel? for mocking purposes
How many times do I need to apologise?! It was just for a good laugh.
Yep. The RUclips was in it for money via his viewer ship while the rest of us played for fun. He even offered me cash if I set my own clan up as his victims. Pissed me off. He played for cash, we played for fun.
Alan Hembra reminds me of the minecraft 2b2t server and the youtuber TheCampingRusher (minus the difamation part) althought i. That case one can argue if he really pkaned it or if it was just a side effect of a big youtuber highlithing the server brought a flood of fanboys (and griefers), also it was an anachy server wich had had plenty of civil wars before
Weird unrelated side-note to the artists here, but I love how whenever you say "heck" a snake shows up.
It's a nice easter egg in these videos.
i never realised that thanks
7:28 Uhm,, small correction: Germany has some of the highest electricity prices in all of Europe, They are nearly twice as high as those in France, for example.
Also some of the highest co2 pollution per capita of all of western europe! Simply because of the unsubstantiated fear of nuclear power.
THANK YOU
I just wanted a can of beans - instead I got 8mm chunk of lead implanted in the skull. Did not taste the same.
Synthx that really depends on where you get hit. the right part of your brain will make you taste or smell anything. Hell, you could taste purple
And agent orange
DayZ is a bad example to use to make this point, because there's very little reward or impetus for cooperation in that specific game. The zombies in DayZ never "end", they will always respawn. They reward very little if anything for killing them, and consume your resources for the attempt. They've always been a janky, badly-programmed mess that are not fun to fight, which is why most players avoid fighting them except in self-defense. Nobody "hunts" zombies in DayZ as an active effort because it's a pointless thing to do. You will never "clear out" a town, you will never retake a settlement, there's no incentive to cooperation in DayZ beyond your clan or your best mates versus other people doing the same. Loot respawns on every server reload, so there isn't actually dwindling resources, and the resources that do exist in the game only really exist for the purpose of killing other players because there isn't really anything else to DO in that game besides kill people, farm pumpkins or read Moby Dick.
MatthewZenith This.
Totally Agree w/ this, anyone who has played DayZ knows resources respawn on reset and everything is geared towards getting advantages over and killing other players.
This was the right answer to this video.
Yep, that's precisely the purpose of the game.
DayZ is designed to create these cliche zombie movie scenario, it has nothing to do with human psychology.
It's as stupid as saying that if everybody was just standing still during a football game, then no one would lose.
Yes, and it would be the most boring game in the world.
At the very least, cooperation and solving the tragedy of commons would resolve the issue of winding up naked in the middle of nowhere with a bullet in each leg because you found a sandwich and a pair of pants someone more heavily armed than you hadn't.
7:30
I understand its supposed to be a spiral of "Me" but my dumb internet brain can only see a ton of Meme's
Greetings from Germany: We shut down our nuclear reactors in reaction to the disaster in Japan. We do produce a lot of wind and solar energy. But we are burning a lot of dirty (brown) coal to make up the rest. So at the moment we put out way to much CO2.
bee2hive modern nuclear is so much safer, and Germany is probably one of the better places to have a nuke plant
"Japan got hit by a tsunami! Quick, shut down our nuclear reactors" -Germany
precisely double the emissions per Kwh than France.
having a nuclear reactor blow up is like having a passenger plane crash; it's big, spectacular, and not actually very common in the grand scheme of things.
And meanwhile, buy french nuclear energy.
Simple solution : in games with survival make the zombie threat big enough to actually make people feel like thier is a Choice to make.
Zombies in day are no threat therefore no choice.
I guarantee if you spawn people in groups in a house together with zombies pouring in people will work together.
The threat has to be big enough that even ONE IDIOT knows he won't survive by himself.
And maybe not even with a group......
Yeah, you barely notice the zombies in Day Z. And if the game isnt about surviving the zombies, that leaves only one group to use the guns on: players.
Don't be so sure. What's stopping the survivors from simply grabbing what they can and bailing? The zombie horde? People are still gonna try anyways because they trust themselves more than they trust a bunch of strangers.
Doctorgeo7 maybe 2 or 3 times. But if the zombies are so dangerous that you need cooperation to survive people will learn eventually. Too bad the real life only has one earth, so we cant learn through failure.
There are zombies in DayZ? I just remember hours and hours roaming the countryside attempting to get to the same location as my friends so we could play together.
i play an old game called tf2, we have a gamemode where you and 5 ppl fight against AI, so all 6 must cooperate to win that mode, but you always find assholes who only think on themselves and don't help the others, and you must pay to play that mode so many times you get stuck cos they are bad playin or don't want to hear the others
Does this means the solution to the Tragedy of the Commons will sit in early access for 4+ years?
DayZ, the world longest alpha.
Who leaves alpha first? DayZ or Star Citizen?
Yeah, next to Rust and Project Zombiod, yes?
Day z is dead. They already stopped the content, and focused on porting.
😂😂😂😂😂😂 nice one dude 😂
Players don't just suddenly not trust anybody, there is actually reason behind this (you guys even made a video on this called bartle's taxonomy I think). It is because of the killers that the players are forced to not trust anybody because killers are known to betray and kill for their amusement and anybody could be killers so in the end you could say that the creators of this game knew that people were going to betray and kill each other (and that is the only thing we were going to do) in making this huge landmark of a game. It's not that people don't want to work with each other it is actually the complete opposite of that. People really do want to work with each other. Its just this idea that the killer will come out and stab you in the back.
"Hey, welcome to the server! Here's an AK and some bandages to get started. We've got a nice, littl-"
*gets shot immediately*
When 90 percent of players shoot on sight you either shoot on sight or you die.
@Himalayan Duck Pretty much, other times tranfers are really just done in groups with other groups on skype or discord since nobody will trust a random.
You literally just repeated the video's point..
This is also the dark forest theory
The renewable energy part is not quite correct. Greetings from germany. Nice videos tho
Yes to Nuclear energy, no to whatever Germany is doing nowadays
Then could you please tell us what is correct about Germany and how to access the money you want to give us?
How so? I would really like to know.
@@The360MlgNoscoper nuclear is safer cleaner and way more efficient and cheaper than renewables Germany fucked up and is buying nuclear energy from France
@@niydfass1060 i build power substations and plants for a living. people think that magic and ponies raining from the sky will fix all emission issues and whatnot. some energy sources are not appropriate for the application. for example, if you were to turn an electric blast furnace at a steel mill, but you only have a solar farm in gen assets. that won't work at all
DayZ has zombies?
Now they have been replaced with RUSSIAN PLAYERS
j Schroeder an insult that would work for the 2014/5 version of the game bb
Does that means zomebies in DayZ saw players pvp,took pity on them and left?
AHAHAHA HAHA OH MY GOD YOU ARE SO NOT FUNNY
I don't play the game, but are you making fun of the fact that players(especially well armed groups) are so much the problem to beginner players that they forget about the zombies?
Props to the artists on this one. Once again, I was immensely amused by some of the visuals. I love that EC now has its own stash of memes to draw upon. And that Stardew Valley reference? Noice.
ZorlockDarksoul, Walpole made those memes from his financial wizardry powres.
I loved the star dew valley one XD
IT WAS
BWAAAAAAAAPOLE
ZorlockDarksoul Where's the Stardew Valley reference? I want to see it
3:30 Farmer trying to remember Shane's birthday.
You see I always fall for this trap, because I know someone will always fall for the trap, I just want a head start.
very applicable right now.
So... what you are saying is... the means of production... should belong to the citizenry who generate and operate it for the collective good......
Extra Credits confirmed comrades
Workers of the Gaming Industry Unite
That part, communism had correct. Too bad all the contemporary "communist" regimes of the 20th century didn't follow that idea, instead concentrating wealth and power among a group of communist party officials; inadvertently creating the exact scenario that Karl Marx railed against, except it was party officials rather than corporate titans who got all the wealth.
COMRADE CREDITS
I think the inherent flaw with communist revolutions is in order to take the resources of the country and redistribute them.
You have to create an extremely powerful authoritarian government. To take said resources.
Then that government needs to give that power and the wealth back to the people.
There seems to always be a failure with step 2. I blame human nature.
GhostInTheShell29 read the bread book, anarchist communism is a thing
I like the snek that appears every time you say "heck"
The snek?
TunaSammich yes
I feel like the tragedy of the commons doesn't work in the context of Day-Z. In Day-Z alot of the fun comes from messing with other people.
dayz just shows what people resort to when they know they dont need to take responsibilty for their actions
For people who find that fun yeah.
@@Avenus112 For people that don't, there are other games.
@@sdmitch16 for real.
@Michal Maciej In my opinion, GTAO is what you get when people aren’t responsible for their actions
I love that you actually used and explained the term "tragedy of the commons" correctly.
The problem with this example is that almost nobody plays dayzto surivive for as long as possible. They play it to kill other players, build bases and get cool loot. Killing other players is the end not the means.
Now, a DayZ where the goal is to survive prolonged periods of time with everyone else... That could be interesting.
Then again, its not at satisfying as murder.
Yepp, don't know how you would make that fun.
But it would be very interesting if someone could make that work.
We already have that game.. Ark.. That game requires you to work together if you want to get anything done. Arguably it even has more insidious kinds of PvP, since your body remains sleeping whenever you log out. One of the worst things you can do to a player is put shackles on them while they're sleeping. Yet, despite all of that, people tend to work together in that game so long as people don't betray your trust.
Recently played Nicky Case's game "The Evolution of Trust": ncase.me/trust/ Seems relevant to the topic.
Thanks for the link, i'm now playing this
Edit: Just finish'd ... WOW that was amazing !!!
This game.
I love this game now. Thanks for introducing me to this guy's work!
That's a great way of showing that distrusting everyone leads to everyone losing out
Snek yeah
I've seen it when it first came out... it's lovely done
“Remember the tragedy of the commons, Remember DayZ” It sounds like the beginning of a poem.
I am constantly impressed at how deep this channel is in terms of encouraging viewers to engage in the big picture, in the community of our world. So so good!
I'm sorry to disapoint you, but we germans actually buy nuclear energy from France.. (and they don't have nearly as many regulations as we do! Politics....)
Although that´s more like a temporary thing because Merkel, as usual, has rushed that descision without having an actual plan how to do it. Doesn´t change the fact that Germany is one of the leading countries when it comes to renewable energy and other countries will learn a valuable lesson from our mistakes when they do the switch!
c4blew Well, you say that, but the nuclear industry is one that roads a lot to get going again once neglected, never mind actually shut down. Years of indecision from the nineties onwards has given us enough sturgeon to maintain existing plant and get new build going here in Blighty, even without ever deciding to actually shutdown.
Sure, apart from lobbying, the german government has pumped millions of DM into building these reactors in the past and knew they probably would be sitting on the costs of storaging them, so they naturally were inclined not to abandon nuclear energy and write that money off, but now that the decision has been made building new nuclear plants, at least light-water-reactors, would be political suicide and met by heavy resistance from the german population who are overwhelmingly against nuclear energy.
Also without the massive subsidies that made the reactors profitable for the energy companies in the first place, building new plants is pretty pointless since it´s not profitable for them anymore. They might try to keep the existing plants running as long as possible but that also would be more and more difficult because of the security concerns of the german population. I´d say Germany for that reason will even start to pressure their neighbors like Belgium to shut down old brittle reactors near their borders like Tihange etc. because the security risk are too high.
Breeder reactors is a different story however, since the used fuel rods from the LWRs, that now have to be costly storaged, could be re-used and would be much less radioactive afterwards. Also Breeders are far less dangerous since they can´t produce a fallout so I could see people changing their minds about that...but LWRs, no, that ship has sailed.
And you've been burning more coal and Natgas than ever thanks to Frau Merkel hitting the fucking panic button after Fukushima.
Lasting Longbow but you can turnoff wind turbine and you can stop solar panels from inserting energy. In my country side are many turbines and if there is a windy and also sunny days, some of turbines won't rotate. The problem isn't too much energy, it is the distribution among Europe. For example the bavarian government blockades the creation of an "energy lane" through Germany, that would solve many problems.
As a Sociology student who has studied the Tragedy of the Commons, I'm impressed. Usually when people talk about it they just go to "and that's why everything should be privatized", despite the fact that this just creates the problem on a larger scale as the owners do things that are beneficial for themselves short-term and do not benefit either the long-term viability of the Earth or the people who pay to use that resource. The options you mentioned at the end- smaller, democratic agreements and incentives for good behavior- are much more plausible long-term options.
Yeah, I don't understand how rightards don't understand this.
Maybe the ones who do aren't rightards any more then.
Interesting comment and replies. However, let's consider the following:
One, the German power example involved some level of privatization. After all, the people who owned the land were incentivized to install the green technology by private gain (i.e. money) not by social good will.
Two, on a small scale, you still have the same problem. For instance, on the small scale a village may not see that their actions aversely affect their neighbors, and -since their neighbors have no voice in the small collective - will still operate with potential damage to others for their own gain.
Again, we return to the same issue. To get people to cooperate it generally either requires immense force or appealing to their self interest.
When resources become, prices become high conserving natural resources. People who want to use find alternatives.
Anything held in common gets trashed, because of self interests and a lack of responsibility. In small towns or tribes around 150 or so, a common space may be preserved by all. However in larger societies with more abstracted benefits and more strangers, in western countries where you lack a monoculture ( i.e. In Japan there are no street bins, and yet have clean streets due to a homogenous culture and social structure) the best way to operate is to only concern yourself with yourself, friends and family. However, investing capital in a small business would be an example of a pitched effort to establish something which has a return for those who invested.
So the micro of capitalism is a cooperative structure.
In the macro, though corporations and businesses compete amongst one another.
This competition ensures that a restaurant has the best service for the price (or it won't last long) as it is competing for you. You and your money are the resources, for the product or service.
So then how do we prevent the tragedy of the commons occurring amongst corporations? (Talking about the earth as the common)
- Regulations are an option, though these can hurt small businesses more than the large while allowing the large companies less direct competition. Oh, and it is an expansion of the power and growth of the state for those worried about that. However, it is the most obvious solution.
- You could incentivize renewable processes within the businesses, which may help small businesses as they could be easier to adapt. This program will cost more money and grow government again (which also costs money).
- The only other thing I can think of (and this is off the top of my head) would be some sort of encouragement of research investments between companies, with perhaps some sort of tax cut of the money invested in this manner.(this idea is still early access, so still needs refining)=P
3:31
Is that? No it can't be shane from star dew valley. I didn't think you would use those characters thx
This hits different in the Corona era
Nuclear energy isn't the boogeyman everyone makes it out to be, though. As long as you build the plant on a geologically stable area (e.g. NOT JAPAN), and make sure the operation staff are reasonably competent (e.g. NOT CHERNOBYL), it's a fantastic low-polluting, long-lasting alternative to fossil fuels, AND provides much more energy output for much less space and cost than green energy production.
I'm Very Angry It's Not Butter!! BURN THE HERETIC
And people being people, human error is the actual threat to the system.
ruclips.net/video/2yZGcr0mpw0/видео.html
I'm Very Angry It's Not Butter!! Another problem with nuclear energy is produces a lot of nuclear waste which takes decades to decay far enough for it to be safe. So you also need a place where all of this nuclear waste can be stored safely. Of course it needs to be guarded as well since it is not that hard to build a dirty bomb out of nuclear waste
W Krah there are a lot of uninhabitable places where you can dig a really deep hole and bury nuclear waste.
A major problem with bringing the long term goal to these games is it’s kinda boring.
With games like DayZ and Rust, getting resources is kinda boring, and it doesn’t have the same creative liberty as Minecraft or Terraria. Yeah, it’s safer to have the server work together, but it gets kinda boring. It’s fun when niceness is the exception, not the rule.
Yes I agree. If everyone co-operated in say Day-Z what would you end up with? Besids a barn full of stuff, and a lot of pepole ambling about beeing bored and not shooting stuff x3
Co-op is just sooo important in so many situations! Just think about how ants work
I think you're forgetting one absolute flaw in this:
I WANT the tragedy of commons, I WANT to have "dwindle down to the last man" scenario.
This to me, is immensely fun.
@@theinternetpolice4365 Which is exactly what this Troy person wants. Some people just want/like that kind of thing. Even in real life some people want war for nothing more than to create drama which is considered to be an exciting thing for them
@@qpSubZeroqp Some people just want to watch the world burn.
I mean Jurassic park is intresting. But never as interesting as when everything goes wrong.
Conflict makes the story.
The mod (now standalone release on Steam) "No more room in hell" is a pretty fantastic example of this concept, your character can just grab EVERYTHING he sees and try to solo it all but that never EVER works, meanwhile if you are considerate of the needs of the group and share the gear fairly your group (with You in it) is almost guaranteed to survive.
Ye... some times you will meet good soul who will shoot you in back for medecine. So work with group but don't trust them
I’d like to point out that the original tragedy of the commons example was almost entirely fabricated by Britain’s nobility to seize common land for themselves. In almost every community the common land worked out great because there was trust and community within the villages. Trashed of the Commons only comes into effect when there isn’t trust and where maximizing personal profit is the biggest goal.
I think this has to do with the size of the community. As long as it's 100-150 people maximum, it works fine. After that, the system breaks down.
to the contrary, there were large communes throughout Medieval Europe that existed with communal spaces for generations. Take Dithmarschen, for example.
anlumo1 most commons for most of the middle ages were within that size range. Add a small amount of enforcement for larger ones and you're pretty well off.
not necessarily. There were a number of large ones that lasted for generations just fine by just being a commune. Dithmarshen for example only ended when it was invaded and conquered by local nobility afraid its existence was starting to cause dissent over a hundred years after its creation.
Are you sure you aren't just a socialist?
I totally disagree, but you will prob not read this:
DayZ had/has absolutely no reason to co-op. None at all. Resources respawn, so it is not like loot become that scarce because of player, the loot is just scarce in general promoting/forcing to kill strangers. There are nothing else to do in DayZ than eat, walk and find guns. So the only gameplay possible is gunfights, which is why people KoS not due to T of Commons. Loot becomes even more vital with the fact that you can build absolutely ZERO objects; No base, no crate, no locker or anything to store. There is no reason to coop in DayZ, besides with your friends. Strangers are useless and the only coop you can have is a chat over the mic.
People does not just share equally in real life due to friendship. We are group animals and cooperation makes survivability easier, than if you ate all yourself and let the colony starve. Nature at its finest. This is not the case in DayZ. Sharing makes YOUR chances to survive lower, while hoarding increases it.
Nice idea, but you should have picked another game to relate to. DayZ simply does not have the content to promote anything else than KoS.
Ooooh, I can see this problem on RUclips hehe
Great video as aways guys :D
Que pena que vc não vai responder esse comentário,mas, legal ver vc aqui.
Você ? AQUI ? KKKKKK MANERO
but.. why do we want to stop this in games? Part of what makes DayZ so great is the fact that this phenomena exists at all. If it didn't, the game would be outright much less fun. If anything, having a platform to indulge in this kind of behaviour is pretty cathartic, because we know we can't be that selfish in real life, and it serves to highlight how terrible that kind of action is.
Precisely. What made DayZ amazing is that it being a petry dish of humanity's worst debauchery made the rare altruistic act all the more impactful. Also it's generally fun to be an asshole in a game ABOUT BEING AN ASSHOLE.
jav to bad I heard that they made the game pay to win
D08 no they didn’t?
what games have this?
There are people who (stupidly) think that cooperation in the real world is for chumps.
Those people suck. They are known as "libertarians".
Nuclear in Germany is being phased out, despite energy shortages, which have to be compensated for with expensive foreign electricity.
You can't just turn off all the power plants that produce power consistently, and rely on renewable energy sources which are unpredictable, or only work during daytime.
We are indirectly incentivizing nuclear power plants in neighboring countries with potentially way less stringent safety regulations. Not to mention we still have nuclear waste deposits in Germany that are still being delivered to, from France for example, if I remember correctly.
Tl;dr: We just buy nuclear power from elsewhere.
Germany mostly buys power from france, which is almost exclusively nuclear: they relocated the risk of nuclear metdown and waste to their neighbour. The point about incentives is a good one though.
Maxime Teppe, meltdown, sure, waste, only barely. France still transported large amounts of waste to our nuclear waste dumps right up until we stopped taking it a year back (I think), and is currently creating a large nuclear waste dump close to the German border. In my opinion, not exactly a significant change.
Atheist Lillu, you are correct, I'm not sure why, but I always used it this way. I see "TL;DR" as more of a thing that you read if you skip over the rest of the text, i.e. while reading you get bored, scroll down and see the abridged version.
J O, wind is highly variable. And "working on better storage" literally does not change the fact that as of right now, and the foreseeable future, we do not have battery parks of the proportions needed to support our system through the night. If we're just banking on future technology working out all our problems, we might as well just use coal and oil, and assume that in the future we will fix the shortcomings of those with technology.
And as for hydro, that is very limited in scope and location. You cannot build a hydro power plant anywhere, and the maximum power output is *highly* dependent on the rate of incoming water into the reservoir. A warm summer, and suddenly those bring a lot less power.
They use light water reactors though, the risk of a bona fide meltdown is very low. Usually when they crap out you get a radioactive steam explosion instead... =p
TL;DR stands for "Too Long; Didn't Read." It started as a joking reference to the way some people will simply skip to the last paragraph of a long post or story to get the gist of it, rather than reading the full text to get all the details. That's why it's often at the end.
Nuclear waste disposal is an extremely difficult problem to solve, and is a bigger concern in many ways than the reactors themselves. I know we're in a pretty bad situation with regards to it here in the US. Nuclear has the _potential_ to be done relatively safely, but it would require concerted effort at a national level. It's probably still better than fossil fuels, though.
There are a lot of things that could potentially be done to improve renewable energy sources. There needs to be more research on how to build and retrofit homes that can harvest at least some of their own energy (and other resources, like water, food, etc), and how to reduce the energy consumption of the average household. Also, more efficient ways to store and distribute energy would be great.
The problem is that, at present, we have this "tragedy of the commons" thing going on. Everything is driven by profit, and because clean energy wouldn't necessarily be profitable, it doesn't get nearly the research efforts it deserves. Existing corporations that have become monoliths because of fossil fuels would easily have the resources and infrastructure to work on this stuff. But they _aren't doing it,_ because it's not profitable enough. There are companies trying to look into it, Tesla being a prominent example, but it deserves a hell of a lot more attention than it's getting.
*TL;DR* Capitalism strongly incentivizes self-interest at the expense of the group, and it's going to doom us all.
The Klingons have a perfect saying for this
"only a fool fights in a burning building"
if you're fighting each other despite the encroaching death no one will win
That Earthbound remix in the credits is fire. Also, this video really hits the nail on the head and puts to words an unspeakable something that I've been noticing a lot in the zombie genre. Thanks for posting.
I love the cows, I love how EC draws animals. The silly houses from EH are the best part of EH.
gotta say dayz is a bad example, the goal of dayz is not to beat the zombie apocalypse. in fact there is no goal to the game.
so why should players work together if there is nothing to achieve or to be gained form cooperation. the only reason players work together is because they can overpower other players, and thats what they did.
in games where there is a global goal for players to achieve, players usually work together remarkably well.
even in games like rust or age of conan players dont fight other players because they couldn't achieve a goal on their own, they just want to achieve it faster plus fighting other players is also a lot more exciting then fighting an AI for hours.
i understand your theory and what you are trying to say, but the examples you used where very poorly chosen/analysed. it feels like you just wanted something to confirm your theory and didn't bother looking into why players behave as they do in those games.
While it's true that some players enjoy choosing a goal that is mostly competitive (as you said, the goal is up for the player to decide), it is reasonable to assume that the same liberty in choosing a goal is used by other players to justify a more cooperative one, and thus apply some of the sociology discussed in this video to that end. Of course, a main thesis of the video was that group cooperation is in fact better for the individual overall, and that therefore even individuals who only act in self-interest should use it. Thus it's important to didtinguish between players who attack each other just for fun (for whom this discussion isn't relevant) with players who attack each other because they think it will be beneficial from a rescources perspective, even if it isn't in the long run. The latter group should be made aware of the psychological fallacy causing their actions, as it will improve their outcomes in-game.
It may not have an explicit goal but it has an explicit failstate: Death.
Arguably your existence should be spent trying to avoid that as long as possible, don't you think?
...And given that death can be avoided given sufficient in-game rescources, it makes sense to adopt a cooperation strategy for the sake of long-term death avoidance.
shure, but avoiding death is not the same as "defeating the zombie apocalypse". also cooperation does not really help much with surviving against the zombies. the safest way to play dayz would be to run around random villages and scavenge food with a crowbar.
everyone does that once, until they recognize its just boring.
see there is a mechanic in the game that spawns zombies around you if you shoot guns. thereby guns are completely useless for defense against zombies, except in very tight situations.
the reason for this is to make player fights more interesting since on top of players shooting each other they will also attract more zombies.
all of this is to emphasize dayz is at its core a pvp game. all the survival elements just serve to give more weight to death, thereby increasing tension in fights.
now for rust and age of conan, survival itself isn't even much of a challenge, where there no other players, so that argument is even harder to make.
another point to counter that whole argument is that generation of resources in games does not constrain to the same rules as reality. you can't overfarm a plot of land and it will loose its grass. resources always generate at the same rate, regardless of if, how or by whom they are beeing used.
atleast thats the case in 99% of games.
its not like its not possible to do it realistically, but it would be very complex to communicate such mechanics to players in a transparent way.
its a lot easier to just have resource X generate Y amount per time, and thats it.
I'm going to assume you guys never played DayZ for terribly long, because cooperative play becomes the means to control the large sections of the map after a while. I was a master admin for one of the more popular DayZ servers back when it was still a mod, and the vast majority of players that stuck around for long would find small groups they would work with. Those groups often fought over resources, but given how much attention we put into preventing cheaters from being able to wipe players progress (regular backups of the SQL database and tools we used to watch for suspicious activity) it tended to allow players to collect resources and even vehicles to hide in the middle of nowhere with some small asurance that it would still be around the next day.
Once it became possible to collect resources that needed to be protected, people started working together almost immediately. Our slightly modified map allowed for three or so helicopters to be spawned at once, and I distinctly remember a time where a large group of players took control of one of the helicopters, loaded it with ammo, and took it around stealing people's shit before absconding to their hidden retreat in the middle of nowhere. The only reason that it didn't go further was just the limited ability to prevent server restarts, cheaters, and the lack of real base building mechanics.
The issue with "the tragedy of the common" is that it became an example without it ever having happened(literally- as in we have no written record of it ever having happened in England) the needs of the community check the forces of individuals fairly effectively.
What an awesome channel. I love you guys. Not only is the content informative, you guys are trying to implement it on a real-world scale. I admire that.
Plus, your artist kicks ass. 7:26 got me lol
Another tragedy of the commons example: The houses that leave a bowl of candy out on Halloween. Those giant bowls are usually empty in less than an hour 😩
SuperVoodude But the kids who took the big scoops aren't screwing themselves, since they probably weren't planning on coming back after filling up their bag.
I've rarely had anyone just grab everything in a bowl when I've put one out.
Sorry, but this time you guys have over-thought the topic so much that you're creating issues that don't exist.
The *real* problem with DayZ is that the "threat" of the zeds is non-existent. There's just so few zeds, and they're so incredibly easy to deal with in so many different ways. This makes PvE gameplay incredibly dull and tedious, which naturally incentivizes investment in the PvP gameplay.
I think their focus was way more about communicating the idea of the Tragedy of the Commons. Even though DayZ isn't strictly as they describe it tries to be and helps that idea along.
Its a great channel, but the overthinking pf the narrative tends to be a recurring problem
Its because most zeds died again, they starved due to lack of players playing. :P
Indeed. No matter what the original intent was, Zeds ended up being nothing but an obstacle to move around in a loot-dense areas freely. Merely having a zed chasing a player was making him vulnerable for detection by other players, let alone using firearms to deal with them, which meant they had to be dealt with silently or avoided entirely. It was never been considered anything beyond that.
Spontaneous cooperation requires incentives and means. There were neither in DayZ - no direct real-time voice link or ally tagging for beneficial teamwork without friendly fire and betrayal, no need for teamwork against Zeds, futility of picking up or waiting on fallen teammates and necessity to separate spoils.
The problem essentially is that DayZ is not a case for Tragedy of the Commons, as it didn't hinged on people perpetual self-interest, but rather that the mod itself was designed to be bare-bone and aside from pre-intended team bonds, nothing facilitated or maintained cooperation from mechanical perspective.
Absolutely this. I get that they wanted to illustrate the whole "tragedy of the commons" to their gaming audience, but DayZ was a pretty poor example.
DayZ wasn't meant to be a PvE experience, it's meant to be a PvP experience where everyone is out for themselves and the interesting conflict that it creates.
This is why PUBG/The battle royale genre is the natural evolution of DayZ, it takes the core experience of DayZ (The PvP) and removes the useless bloat (The Zombies) to create a more focused and fun experience.
6:37 Cheeky Easter egg you got there
Extra Credits has to be one of my favorite educational-gaming channels. :D
The Hecknomancer Snake returns! Did you see it?
got a timestamp?
2:41, right as Dan says 'heck'
The snake is actually more old than that but don't remember the episode in which episode appear
If we want to talk about systems of trust, we've GOT to talk about EVE Online.
Nothing else demands cooperation and yet promotes betrayal like EVE.
Imagine a world where governments didn't exist and the only real power structures were corporations, and you have EVE.
EVE is practically capitalism, the game.
But IN SPACE!
And yet.. look at all those players have accomplished. They broke all expectations for achievement in terms of what the players have access to. Titans, impossible for one player to grind, are able to be made through cooperative play that all stems from players seeking out their own opportunities and desires. Individuals, working in their own self interest, wind up creating something collaboratively that would be almost impossible otherwise. If anything, I think EVE shows the success of capitalism, it's capacity for progress and growth in an otherwise entirely hostile world.
Hell.. take the lowsec systems in EVE for example. Unlike nullsec (where the player alliances live) there are tons of restrictions placed upon what can and can't be done. Lowsec is a significantly more dangerous place to roam as gangs of criminals that know how to avoid the law of the land are just fucking everywhere. Yeah, nullsec is dangerous, but not as dangerous as lowsec and only slightly less safe than highsec. The power blocs in nullsec typically war out of boredom for how safe things tend to become. I've seen that played out time and time again.
RurikLoderr, EVE would be so successful if it wasn't impossible for new players to get into.
One, it is successful. Two, it is easily possible for new players to get into it. Three, it's not for everyone.. it's a very complex game and it asks a lot of the players involved.
There is an update for the alpha version, makes the f2p less like an unlimited trial version
Well, this is my first time watching an Extra Credits episode fresh out of RUclips. It took me around a year and a half, but I finally watched all 15 seasons 😎
I'm a big fan, and I look forward to upcoming content :)
Nuclear power is the answer especially a thorium reactor
ALL HAIL THORIUM
Sure, why use clean wind and solar power if we can instead use a dangerous process that leaves us with radioactive waste for the next 200,000 years or so. :P
As for the thorium reactors: We'll see about that if they manage to develop one that actually works as advertised. There's still a lot of speculation involved.
@@MorsInvictus simple, we need enough power to use all of are different things
@@MorsInvictus look into thorium reactors. Very different animal to the uranium reactors. The waste has a way shorter halflife and the plants can easily be designed to be melt-down-proof, even (especially) in the event of human failure or natural disaster.
Dear extra credits,
I understand that the use of DayZ in this scenario of PvP shooting-yourself-in-the-foot. That being said, many survival games revolve around PvP as a central mechanic, to put humans against each other. If a game is purely focused around the common enemy, the undead, there would be no PvP, as it would be useless. But it is not, and having PvP can actually entise players to work together against a bigger threat of other humans(in a perfect scenario that is, which I have actually been apart of myself)
If you ever get around to seeing my comment, take a look at what else we can learn learn from survival games like DayZ
1) The self vs. The group vs. The everyone
2) How humans interact when truly given the choice to kill everyone
3) PvP vs. PvE, pros and cons
4) Primal instinct vs. Methodical thought, which will get you further
5) How realistic is too realistic in survival game scenarios
That's all I got for now, but I'll be back. Cya!
I'm pretty sure DayZ was only taken as a representative title for the whole genre. Of course the whole genre of survival games inhabits this issue. The video was not meant as a rant about the game, but an explanation of the system that lies underneath, how it influences the behaviour of players and how to design future games around that. Your points are valid, but have nothing to do with what the video was trying to say.
I think the fallacy is their assumption that DayZ was meant to be a PvE shooter, and people just started fighting each other because of lack of trust. That's not the case, however. The PvE component is quite poorly designed, and pretty much everyone played that game specifically for PvP. All of the games in that genre were designed specifically for PvP, and people played them specifically for that experience.
In other words, it's not the issue, it's something that the developers of those games intentionally designed their games for(the original DayZ mod was created by someone influenced by his army experience, where one exercise had them dropped off into the jungle with the goal to survive, with each soldier working on his own).
It would be a good example if the game was actually designed in a way that would make mutual cooperation of all players valuable, but instead there's really no reason to have such levels of cooperation in DayZ, because the reason why one is playing this game is specifically to fight other players.
I don't think EC assumed DayZ is a PvE shooter.
I mean he even says it in the video.
As game designers, they rely on this piece of psychology to make the game fun.
He's explaining WHY DayZ works. Not how it should work.
And then, when there is a lull in energy consumption in Germany, they just dump all of it on neighboring countries with little regard for their power grids, often causing localized blackouts. Well, what a system! It's just large scale enough that you failed to see all the resources required to keep it working, which disappoints me.
All you say is true. For I have experienced everything from Cannibal Cults, to bandit groups, to The Brotherhood of Steel, To The Drifters, to militaristic groups, and dictators, to safehouseses and taxi services. Such is the joy of DayZ
-John TAN (Captain of The TAN Army stationed in Zub Castle)
In 2020, replace every reference to guns and ammo with toilet paper.
I live in Germany, we actually built solar panels on our roof and are selling the power for a higher price than the power we buy for normal usage. But the incentives and therefore the prices dropped quite a bit, so if you build solar panels now you're selling for less, so you have to try to use the energy yourself and probably even storing it
Thought this was going to be a video on the tragedy of DayZ's development. :P
When I played borderlands 2 with my cousin, this happened to me more or less. He always rushed through every area to get all the gear he could get his hands on. So, in order to keep from missing out on all the loot, I started doing the same. I would rush through and take as much as my inventory would allow because I had this mindset of "if I don't take it all, hell take it all." So in the end we kept reinforcing each others reasoning for running in and taking all we could carry.
Extra Credits: everyone share!
Hungry Games:
Did you misspell that, or are you referencing something different...
one week later
*Extra Credits advocates communist revolution*
COMRADE
Wouldnt be surprised if they did.
Dkz 1917 They are social engineers in disguise.
To what? Further demonstrate the point made in this video?
REVOLUTION
In single players you tend to fight the NPC so they are predictable but in online games you play against other experts or thats what youll think so youll use everything because they can also use their everything
So glad you started your video like that haha, it's so so true.
I'm usually 100% in agreement with this channel but they got it completely wrong here in at least one aspect. Dayz isn't about Us vs. The Zombies, it's about everyone vs. everyone else and the zombies/survival is a secondary thing. It's a pvp game and that's what drives the gameplay to be so enjoyable and fun. If everyone worked together there would be NOTHING to do except shoot zombies that respawn infinitely, which are not a real threat to the player.
Pat R this. I think I gave the channel my first dislike after watching the video.
yep, i dont even know why they consider working together as a gameplay feature.
It just makes the game boring and unplayable.
Pat R The problem is other games in the genre, which would be better if they were more PVE oriented, have been inspired by DayZ to make the players more hostile to each other. DayZ is fine with being mostly PVP.
Well, there is the Salmon Run mode in Splatoon 2, where you can't hurt each other anyway, and you must fend off the neverending hordes of Salmonids (intelligent amphibious salmon that look like they came out of Mad Max) until the timer reaches zero. Though it's a side mode in the game, it's been proven very popular among people who play the game. (The main modes are all player versus player; Salmon Run is the only strictly cooperative mode.)
That being said, they did a lot to mix things up and keep it from getting too predictable and repetitive: You're given a different weapon at random every wave, there are many different kinds of Salmonids with various ways they attack and different weak points (Flyfish shoot homing missiles and can ony be damaged by throwing bombs into their missile cases, Steelheads throw explosive spinning tops and their only weak point is when they're charging one up on their foreheads, Stingers head to a remote corner and shoot high-pressure laser-like fluid and must be destroyed section by section until you destroy the head, etc.), occasional special waves appear in which the rules are different (like Goldie Hunt in which you find the valve in which the Goldie is hiding, then shoot at it relentlessly until it goes out of range; Rush, in which the common Chum enemies are twice as fast, do twice as much damage, and charge at designated players; and Cohock Swarm, in which all Chums and Smallfry are replaced with the stronger, burlier Cohocks and you are given cannons that can one-hit kill them), and, most importantly, the mechanic in which the stronger Salmonids drop Golden Eggs that must be picked up and put in the "egg basket"; if the team fails to meet the quota when time runs out, they lose.
In addition, the Salmonids are very much a threat to the four-person team, especially in the Profreshional rank, as they are designed to appear in such large numbers, and the strong Salmonids arrive so frequently, that they will slowly but steadily gain ground compared to the players. I've had many waves in which we were cornered but time ran out and we met the quota, and thus we passed and could move on. But I've had many more waves in which the Salmonids wiped us all out or were such a major obstruction that we couldn't get the Golden Eggs asked of us and we lost.
What you fail to realize is that DayZ could very well be played as a multiplayer vs zombie game, but that the very systems that are described in the video make the players fight against one another after some time. It was even said that game publishers count on this behaviour n order to design their games around pvp combat. It´s not the game that forces you to fight other players, but the resource scarcity that comes after everyone has started hoarding. The video and the channel are in no way wrong here ...
Ok, now do one about the megalixer effect. Where an item is so good it never gets used.
That happens when people save good stuff for big battles, in bt5, I have really good stuff, but I never use them for a big battle.
Is there a reason why that happens?
Make it possible to lose the item in battle, that way there's always a "use it before you lose it" incentive for the player.
Kinda like Super Sonic. You don't want to pop it before you have enough rings to sustain it to the end of the level/boss because that will leave you vunerable but the longer you put off using it the more likely it is that you'll drop all your rings before you get the chance.
Great video! Really inspiring!
Now please excuse me, I've to buy stockpiles of noodles and toilet paper in the grocery store, before my neighbours do.
(Written in France in march 2020)
You earned my subscribe you glorious bastard.
Ironically, the best example of "the commons" being protected by community cooperation is... the commons. English commons were highly effective at being sustainable, but was destroyed when landowners gained control over the commons. As some others here have stated, corporations have regularly employed "tragedy of the commons" arguments to privatize land use and, caring very little for an individual scrap of land in a large landholding structure, have no problem being unsustainable. Privatization is therefore generally a threat to the long-term future of common resources.
In short, small communal land use control is generally quite effective and sustainable. Those social controls work well in a community where the impact of irresponsible land use is easily seen, and where the loss of common resources would be a major loss to all who use it (true from pasture lands to fishing grounds). In small environments, extensive regulation and control (such as dedicated policing or laws) are replaced by the local social pressures to conform to standards of behavior, and the recognition of (and concern for) consequences to neighbors and family if the resources are squandered. But, as Extra Credits rightly points out, humans are rather bad at taking long-term and large-scale perspectives, and the larger the system gets, the more just taking that little bit extra sounds reasonable and "harmless." This is reflected in the modern world in lots of ways, such as people groaning about or shirking paying taxes (not seeing that these resources maintain roads and services that we all depend on and benefit from), or such as global climate change (one person won't change the climate at all appreciably, but there's 7.6 billion of us, so...).
One of the problems I see games suffering from is that there are no consequences for bad behavior. In most survival games, anything can be built or destroyed in moments, so breaking rules (and things) costs you little to actually do, and often can be easily repaired (so the cost of it happening in return is minimal). Additionally, the cost to the player to misbehave also remains minimal. Social ostracism works great when you are trapped in a community, but a player can often shift from game to game with minimal consequences, so there is often little need to play nice. Games seem to need some mechanism to enforce rules and restrictions - costs to make cooperation more valuable than competition. For instance, making multiplayer survival games require more cooperation to progress or to destroy said works (so even playing destructive PVP requires cooperation to function), or in general focusing on making the PVE experience the most rewarding part of gameplay. Finally, I feel that a non-insignificant number of people get on games to play out their worst instincts safely and without consequence (and I'm glad that they do it on-screen rather than in-person), but this means that people often do not come to the game looking to play as their better selves.
What a surprise! The elite spoiling things for the masses!!!
As per usual.
Managing resources? You mean hoarding every item/potion and like never ever using it up in case a really tough battle comes?
Basically what i do in pokemon?
in most games I always feel they are "cheating". Then I slowly warmed up to them, starting with potions my char crafted, and branching out from there. At first they felt like outside help, something I should be able to do without.
Wow, that was pretty deep! I never thought about it like that because I was told ahead of time that ANY interaction in DayZ will end with one of you dead so be ready to fight the moment you meet another player. Sadly, this is probably what would happen in an actual apocalypse situation because desperation leads to selfishness which may well lead to that individual's undoing.
I feel like this situation also has Prisoner's Dilemma vibes, where the logical best individual solution clashes with the logical best total solution, resulting in all involved getting stuck with either the worst individual or the worst total solution
Anyone who has played D&D already knows about sharing incentives when it's time to divide up the treasure... assuming your paladin could keep the thief from being selfish.
While the thief is slowly amassing gold and experience until he can prestige class to assassin and pay to have fancy enough gear made to backstab everyone in their sleep.
...What? You KNOW I'm not allowed to play chaotic evil characters anymore... =p
Edgewalker001 Edgy. Chaotic evil characters can be a lot of fun if played right but just backstabbing everyone else in the party isn't fun ;)
James Kaplan And then the fucking Paladin takes some of the loot because it has an evil aura or some shit, even though it's a magical artifact that could help produce a ton of good in the hands of the wizard, if only the Paladin didn't have a stick up his ass. Or maybe that's just my personal experience with paladins :D
I heard many complaints about paladins holding the group back, refusing to work with certain characters, this "magic hogging" is totally new, but should be expected of zealots of "everything different is evil"
Caleb Wilson, If it makes sense with your character, I say go for it. Don't be surprised if the other players get annoyed though. Unpredictable behaviour is obviously unpredictable, and if it's too random it just ain't fun to play with. But like I said, as long as it's in character it's only half as bad.
texteel, To be entirely fair, I'm fairly certain it was actually an evil artifact. But I could've annihilated an entire enemy army with it, but noooooooo, it's evil, period.
Hahahaha "private companies using resources sustainably" hahahaha
Ok You win, that didn't make sense.
companies can have some of the shortest sighted plans
You know how commercial farmers don't routinely sell off their own seeds and tractors and put themselves out of business? Most people are not idiots. Even if they were , the companies that don't maintain their assets will quickly go bankrupt and out of business. The whole point of capitalism is that it selects against incompetent managers.
Watched this video a hundred times. Just got it... "And SEW". Brilliant.
Germany isn’t a good example when their carbon footprint is higher now due to the energy sources being extremely inefficient and requiring coal plants to be turned back on (the dirtiest moment in time) to make up for shortages, and pay other countries to take their power when too much is produced and threatens to destroy the power grid
oh man, this is definitely one of the best educational channels out there! I learn sooo much from watching all of the videos and a lot of them are applicable in real life, keep up the good work EC team!
While I appreciate your positivity, this was not one of their better videos...
にゃあエイリアンMeowAlien 💆
Read the communist manifesto instead. At least they're up front about their narrative and political views
Just a heads up: You state that paying law enforcement is a disadvantage of introducing laws to prevent the tragedy of the commons. While this is true, it's also a disadvantage of privatising land: this time, the private landowner must pay their own security guards to do the same job (or - as in modern western economies - the state pays law enforcement through taxation). Since the landowner invariably wants to make money (why else would one bother administrating such a project?), this cost just gets placed upon everybody else as a component of the land lease - meaning the overall cost of privatising land is generally higher than socialising it. Whichever perspective you take, preventing tragedy of the commons amongst an arbitrarily large population (anarchism doesn't work in a community of any substantial number of individuals due to lack of trust) NECESSARILY requires the paying of law enforcement in one way or another.
Disclaimer: I'm very strongly in favour of economic Georgism.
Not really because while people generally don't most business have a acceptable loss percentages at the point of economic return
Or the companies could band together to provide their own common but private security without the bureaucratic oversight. This isn't unprecedented either. Medical professionals near me banded together in small groups to offer affordable health insurance once the Obamacare regulations hit.
@@JoshuaBarretto doesn't almost everything ever produced require land to produce it?
One of the basis of your argument is that the landowner wants to make money
Some philosopher whose name are quite well known disagreed on that and believed that the creation of a new selfless man was possible through education and/or social pressure
Reminds me of the huns episodes of the step. And how he got the troops to share the loot and not hoarding the loot for bettering of the common good.
Always pleased when someone mentions starcraft and on top of that, the content is amazing aswell. Nice!
Not exploiting all for short-term personal gain?
Get out of my yard pinko!
Who took the commons in Britain? The wealthy landowners. Some forests also used to be in the commons, and it was where people gathered their firewood. So, once the common people were thrown off the commons and the land ended up in the hands of the elite, the common people were squeezed for every last necessary of life and many people actually died for lack of basic resources that were at least partly provided by the commons before they were privatized. So maybe Neoliberal privatization of modern common resources might just end up in a capitalist squeeze, just like it always has.
Which is why the "tragedy of the commons", which is usually used to say "we should privatize everything", makes a much better case for some form of cooperative or planned economy.
Just make sure that everybody knows the rules and there are consequences for breaking them, and there's no need to split up land for consumption, or create private tyrannies.
Peregrine O'Connor, or, in the case land, it could be broken up into small holdings as opposed to giant estates. Hunting in the USA would also be a good example of regulating resource consumption.
Thomas Except those elites then create four field crop rotation and selective breeding which in turn meant more food was available. This plus the displacement of labour was, among other factors, what made the industrial revolution possible.
TheBespectacledN00b, monks introduced crop rotation, and it was implimented by their tenant farmers on eclesastical land. It was certainly not the idle rich that came up with these improvements. Many other industrialized farming methods, like Cyrus McCormack's reaper, came from the United States, and improvements like seed hybridization and many other crop improvements came out of the state extension universities, seed companies, and Quakers.
That's definitely what happens when you privatize with no thought to regulation, purpose, or who will control the thing in question. Design a system where there is incentive to fairly provide based on the original purpose, and regulation over actions that would detract from it, make it more appealing to the right people, and it can (keyword can) work.
That said there are definitely things that are better off or have less of a risk of not providing for it's purpose when not privatized. Privatizing everything without thought is as unhelpful as never using it at all.
One thing I really enjoyed about the first days of Warlords of Draenor was when people in my realm made a pact to hunt for this rare mount together and manage a list of the people helping out. The mount was dropping from a raid-boss level mob, so we needed a big raid to down it. It was really heartwarming how people adhered to the code and some people even stayed long after their turn to help each other get the rare mount. It's moments like those that make me believe in the good will of strangers.
I can't believe this actually happened irl with toilet paper
7:00
I....don't think Germany is a good example here. Do some mild googling and you'll see that they're having awful problems with brown outs and lack of baseload power
And if you look a little deeper you'll find that the CO2 output has only drop by 5% rather than the 20%you would have expected from the investment. This is because as Germany eliminates it's nuclear power plants it becomes more dependent on coal and gas turbines to cover power it bace line and spikes in demand thus undoing a lot of the good the green power did. To make matters worse coal plants release three times more radiation than nuclear power plants.
Three times than nuclear power plants that work correctly. I don't think that rushing to get away from nuclear energy was right, but it's important. Should have waited a couple more years, until it's easier to store green energy.
Right now it can happen quite often, that there's too much power in the grid so the Austrians "buy" our power, even get paid for it, store it in their huge water plants and sell it a few days later to Germany again. :D It's pretty ridiculous, but necessary to keep the grid from overloading when there's lots of wind and sunshine.
There is no reason to "get away" from nuclear. It is the cleanest, most reliable, most powerful, and most beneficial form of power generation known to man. It can also create millions of dollars of life-saving by-products, and can be configured to create more fuel than it uses--something totally unique to this incredible power source.
And in return you only have to store the used fuel until the end of time
Also it creates tons of waste that we have no other way to handle but to just burry it in deep underground caves, hopefully never to see it again. Rarely works.
Example? One of the deposit places started contaminating the water with radiation. So it had to be dug open, which was expensive, all the waste was taken out and simply dumped somewhere else. Until there's the next problem.
What's the use of "millions of dollars of life-saving by-products" if your way of creating these by-products leads to even more sickness?
Long story short, people who kill on sight in survival games are always the problem.
IRL too
You barely notice the zombies in Day Z. And if the game isnt about surviving the zombies, that leaves only one group to use the guns on: players.
dayz is basically a walking simulator that teaches you cyrillic.
that being said, even in dayz people cooperate trough the chat.
"heard shooting in elektro"
"found mosin in pusta"
"hostile heli in gorka"
etc.
This came up when I was watching your Christmas Truce video, maybe the RUclips recommendation algorithm is onto something.
Earthbound outro music YESSSSSSSS :D
Now you will learn the power that comes from being third!
well that example with german energy is funny, since those got cut big time quite some time ago AND that is not a german/EU power plug.
Just use Nuclear there is no safer option.
My roommate did this beautifully in Breath of the Wild. The legendary weapons from the champions, the master sword and the hylian shield were all mounted on the walls of his homestead until he was going against Ganon. He also knew that while they broke easily, oftentimes the baddies had really decent gear lying around. I even recall him losing a torch during a temple, so he used a Bokoblin club to finish it.
I imagine a multiplayer mode in BotW would do this same thing.
The Prisoner's Dilemma is like a mini simplified version of the Tragedy of the Commons.
You can sell excess solar energy on the grid in the US as well...Except for Hawaii, where they have a massive overabundance of solar energy, so instead, you gotta store it locally, generally with a battery bank. The major problem with the US model is that a lot of people buy into these companies that give you panels for free in exchange for the revenue obtained from selling that power. So I urge people to instead secure a loan, and buy the panel yourself. You get tax breaks on it, and you get to reap the benefits, particularly in the summer. It also keeps your house cooler by shading your roof.
About Germany :
They may be phasing their Nuclear out, but they are importing Nuclear-produced electricity from France in mass to compensate.
Being the leader of green energy is very easy when all your "dirty" energy is produced in another country and thus "doesn't count".
Was just about to comment saying this.
But not like that isn't a taboo topic in public, because people just say "Nuclear is bad" and that's all their argument.
I would much prefer having nuclear reactors with German security standards, than indirectly incentivizing nuclear power from abroad where our regulations simply do not apply.
A policy roughly translated to: "Let the frenchies breathe our smog."
Ironic, considering nuclear power is the best power generation method we have that doesn't produce smog :D
And how many coal power plants did we have to reactivate to phase out nuclear? Oh yeah, many.
*@Beaky*
Because there was a huge earthquake and tsunami in Japan.
You might wonder why we would have to shut down Isar II in the middle of the Alps where there are neither earthquakes nor tsunamis. I wonder, too. Give me a heads up if you find a good reason.
The puns 😂 you either love it or hate it 😂
That pun in the first frame was great