GiganticWebsites.com is a project through which I make it possible for people to build truly gigantic websites (thousands of articles each!) at ridiculously low prices. If you have a great domain you want to turn into an amazing website or an existing site you'd like to upgrade/scale, visit our website or check out the One Minute Economics presentation video below: ruclips.net/video/gE8yEOQFMvo/видео.html Please note that this comment is not an ad for a third-party service provider. GiganticWebsites.com is my baby 100% and I will personally be involved in each and every project so as to ensure the website turns out great :)
From my understanding, people in the real world are very rarely in prisoner's dilemma situations. Much more often, they find themselves in a modified, iterative version. This may explain why they tend to cooperate more.
Yep, there are definitely multiple shades of grey in the real world and as such, the prisoner's dilemma and game theory in general definitely shouldn't be considered something like the Holy Grail of economics :)
It's interesting that you set it up so that if they both testify, it's not the worst collective outcome (6 yrs). I thought part of the idea with the Prisoner's Dilemma was to show that when they both don't cooperate it's worse collectively than when just one of them doesn't testify. Yours is set up so the worst collective outcome is when just one of them testifies. So I'm curious then why you didn't make it for example (5,5) when they both testify?
@@OneMinuteEconomics The best possible solution for the Cold War was that neither the US nor Russia spend money on nuclear armament (0, 0). Unfortunately, if one side didn't spend those military expenses, the other side would have had the military dominance to destroy the side that didn't spend those expenses (- infinity, +100). That means that the best solution for both sides was to spend money on nuclear weapons, even though that would mean that neither side would have the military dominance needed to actually use those weapons (-10, -10). +100 (you arm, they don't) > 0 (you don't arm, neither do they), and -10 (you arm, they arm) > - infinity (you don't arm, they do). It's the Prisoner's Dilemma in action.
One Minute Economics needs your help! Please give me a minute (heh) of your time by watching the following video if you find the channel useful, literally anyone can help (either financially or by spreading the word about my work): ruclips.net/video/io04ckq1X1M/видео.html
Would you consider the entertainment industry's current and upcoming situation with their digital IPs and desires to exclusively offer their content via their own digital platforms an example of this dilemma? In reality all the studios and such would benefit far more by having their content available across a wide range of providers, but only if the other studios offer THEIR content to them in return. So really it is inevitable that each studio will refuse to offer theirs as it would be a huge risk.
It's most definitely an interesting game theory case study, might even publish a few IP-related videos soon-ish (this year). And, sure, I could envision a few ways to phrase the situation so as to make it a PD candidate :)
well to be fair, a small scale social experiment would not very likely arise someone to seek revenge. the calculation required at large scales seems to explain the arms race of intelligence in humans.
The key to the prisoner dilemma is calculable outcomes. You don't get that in real life, which is why poker, with some relatively straight forward maths you can crunch, is relaxing.
Decided to rewatch this today as last time I was high as ballz. Suffice to say it made a lot more sense this time around but I also remember it being a 38 mins documentary of philosophy and logic mechanics 🤷🏻♂️
Thanks a lot Gerard, it's ridiculously difficult to gain traction when publishing family-friendly non-controversial content... but it CAN be done and I'm getting there, one subscriber at a time :)
@@OneMinuteEconomics what I learned through your channel is much better than 4 years of economics you still believe in the viability of cryptocurrency?
Hearing that always makes my day! And to answer your question, I do. But at the same time, I believe a looooooooooooot of market participants need to be flushed out. Otherwise, something with immense potential risks becoming little more than a glorified casino and that would be a shame. The entire space is, in my opinion, a cringeworthy mess from a lot of perspectives. From laser eyes and cult-like behavior to rampant scams. Once these excesses are flushed out, however, I believe decentralized finance can shine through more than "number go up" narratives :)
"The prisoners dilemma explained in One Minute" Me: Why is it 1:29 then? Me a second after that: Oh, so he could round down from 29 seconds to a minute to justify it lol
Actually, no, I get a bit more wiggle room than that :) The basic idea as far as I'm concerned is that as long as you start by saying "one minute" when pronouncing the length of the video, it's all good. So anything from 60 seconds (one minute) to 119 seconds (one minute and fifty-nine seconds). Ironically, my only off-format video is the supply and demand one which is a second or two too short, heh
@@OneMinuteEconomics intersting, thanks for such a measured response considering my initial comment came off pretty prickish lol, thats interesting though esp as someone whos looking to start a podcast/channel in the coming year
also as a HUGE fan of Freakanomics as a teenager like 15yrs ago and recently read their application of game theory to penalty kicks in soccer, if u have any videos applying economic/statistical analysis to everyday/random situations id love to check them out :)
Keep telling myself I'll publish a statistics mini-series where I dig deep(er) one of these days, but my schedule has been a mess in 2022 (not necessarily in a bad way)
For now, I'd recommend checking out my statistics playlist. Mostly just me covering the basics, but with some interesting (I hope) analogies like family reunions for explaining the standard deviation: ruclips.net/p/PLhICud5IUwViF1ibxxm98lEmOlsslI3i_
This is some top-notch content. I read a book with a similar topic, and it was absolutely incredible. "Game Theory and the Pursuit of Algorithmic Fairness" by Jack Frostwell
Why would a justice system convict two people to jailtime consisting of a percentage of the crime being done? Either you did the crime (100%) or you did not do the crime (0%), right?
As a general rule, I am comfortable format-wise as long as you can say the length out loud and it starts with "One Minute"... even "one minute and fifty-nine seconds" as an extreme example. That way, I have enough wiggle room to be able to focus on getting the message across properly and don't have to sacrifice ideas that I consider worth including just for the sake of an overly-rigid format interpretation :)
Outstanding content! If you’re riveted by this, a parallel book is highly advisable. "Game Theory and the Pursuit of Algorithmic Fairness" by Jack Frostwell
How that's not the ideal outcome? Yeah technically Alice not testifying is better, but let's face it in real world situation what if her partner actually rats her and in that case she is 100% sure she will get 8 years imprisonment. So you can't blame Alice
Expooooooooosed :D It's always difficult to find the right balance between the one minute concept and covering the topic properly. The compromise I ended up landing at is this: if you start with "one minute" when pronouncing the length of the video (so anything from 60 to 119 seconds, or if you will anything from one minute to one minute and fifty-nine seconds, heh), it's all good
But he is mathematically right because 1.29 seconds is neither taken as 1 min or 2 minutes unless its more than 1 min 30 seconds. but he could have said " in less than 2 minutes"
SATURDAY APRIL 17,2021 0518HRS Somebody's comment about an Oathkeeper taking a plea deal in his role in The January 6,2021 Capitol Riots brought me here.
Performance enhancing drugs in sports. If neither athlete uses them, then they only have their naturally existing performance advantages over each other, and they avoid the health risks of drugging. If one drugs and the other doesn't, the one who drugs gets an performance advantage by doing so. But if they both use performance enhancing drugs, neither gets an advantage over the other, and they both incur the health risks for no realized gain.
@@carultch Sure, but what about the company that manufactures the drug? The executives? the shareholders? the employees? Can we have some compassion here?
GiganticWebsites.com is a project through which I make it possible for people to build truly gigantic websites (thousands of articles each!) at ridiculously low prices. If you have a great domain you want to turn into an amazing website or an existing site you'd like to upgrade/scale, visit our website or check out the One Minute Economics presentation video below:
ruclips.net/video/gE8yEOQFMvo/видео.html
Please note that this comment is not an ad for a third-party service provider. GiganticWebsites.com is my baby 100% and I will personally be involved in each and every project so as to ensure the website turns out great :)
this is the most comprehensive and straight-to-the point way I've seen the prisoners dilemma explained. Thank you!
From my understanding, people in the real world are very rarely in prisoner's dilemma situations. Much more often, they find themselves in a modified, iterative version. This may explain why they tend to cooperate more.
Yep, there are definitely multiple shades of grey in the real world and as such, the prisoner's dilemma and game theory in general definitely shouldn't be considered something like the Holy Grail of economics :)
The real question is why does the police have a flintlock pistol?
I was reading a paper and this one explained it much better than that research. Thanks a lot. Nice pun at the end XD "Take it with a grain of salt!"
Thanks a lot for the kind words, really happy the video helped you meaningfully understand the concept :)
Not a pun
every smart person knows to not say anything to the pigs.
Lol
he's sigma male 😎🧏@@Purpleblackviolet
Alice broke out of jail after 2 days. She won
It's interesting that you set it up so that if they both testify, it's not the worst collective outcome (6 yrs). I thought part of the idea with the Prisoner's Dilemma was to show that when they both don't cooperate it's worse collectively than when just one of them doesn't testify. Yours is set up so the worst collective outcome is when just one of them testifies. So I'm curious then why you didn't make it for example (5,5) when they both testify?
And this is why the US and Russia both spent so much money on military expenses that were never actually used against each other.
There are indeed many ways to see these dynamics through a game theory lens
@@OneMinuteEconomics The best possible solution for the Cold War was that neither the US nor Russia spend money on nuclear armament (0, 0). Unfortunately, if one side didn't spend those military expenses, the other side would have had the military dominance to destroy the side that didn't spend those expenses (- infinity, +100). That means that the best solution for both sides was to spend money on nuclear weapons, even though that would mean that neither side would have the military dominance needed to actually use those weapons (-10, -10).
+100 (you arm, they don't) > 0 (you don't arm, neither do they), and -10 (you arm, they arm) > - infinity (you don't arm, they do). It's the Prisoner's Dilemma in action.
The way things are going, not sure.
This reminds of Virtue's Last Reward
Late but they even have someone named Alice here
One Minute Economics needs your help! Please give me a minute (heh) of your time by watching the following video if you find the channel useful, literally anyone can help (either financially or by spreading the word about my work): ruclips.net/video/io04ckq1X1M/видео.html
What are some real life examples within organizations such as companies?
Would you consider the entertainment industry's current and upcoming situation with their digital IPs and desires to exclusively offer their content via their own digital platforms an example of this dilemma? In reality all the studios and such would benefit far more by having their content available across a wide range of providers, but only if the other studios offer THEIR content to them in return. So really it is inevitable that each studio will refuse to offer theirs as it would be a huge risk.
It's most definitely an interesting game theory case study, might even publish a few IP-related videos soon-ish (this year). And, sure, I could envision a few ways to phrase the situation so as to make it a PD candidate :)
When you say cooperate, do you mean with each other or with the police?
This game theory ignores what happens once the person who stays silent and gets dobbed on gets out of jail and meets up with the dobber….
:D
well to be fair, a small scale social experiment would not very likely arise someone to seek revenge. the calculation required at large scales seems to explain the arms race of intelligence in humans.
The key to the prisoner dilemma is calculable outcomes. You don't get that in real life, which is why poker, with some relatively straight forward maths you can crunch, is relaxing.
GME Theory
:D
@@OneMinuteEconomics :)
The real question is why is a criminals testimony enough to get an extended sentence.
Decided to rewatch this today as last time I was high as ballz. Suffice to say it made a lot more sense this time around but I also remember it being a 38 mins documentary of philosophy and logic mechanics 🤷🏻♂️
You deserve more subscribers
Thanks a lot Gerard, it's ridiculously difficult to gain traction when publishing family-friendly non-controversial content... but it CAN be done and I'm getting there, one subscriber at a time :)
@@OneMinuteEconomics what I learned through your channel is much better than 4 years of economics you still believe in the viability of cryptocurrency?
Hearing that always makes my day! And to answer your question, I do. But at the same time, I believe a looooooooooooot of market participants need to be flushed out. Otherwise, something with immense potential risks becoming little more than a glorified casino and that would be a shame. The entire space is, in my opinion, a cringeworthy mess from a lot of perspectives. From laser eyes and cult-like behavior to rampant scams. Once these excesses are flushed out, however, I believe decentralized finance can shine through more than "number go up" narratives :)
So is nash equilibrium 3,3 or 1,1 ?
why does whether they did the other crime not factor in
tit for tat: hey you cheated
joss: no u
tit for tat: no u
joss: no u
tit for tat: no u
(game ends)
joss gets victory
Learnt this poring through jurisprudence textbooks some 11 years ago
Heh, awesome!
Excellent!
Thank you! :)
Best video
Glad you like it :)
"The prisoners dilemma explained in One Minute"
Me: Why is it 1:29 then?
Me a second after that: Oh, so he could round down from 29 seconds to a minute to justify it lol
Actually, no, I get a bit more wiggle room than that :) The basic idea as far as I'm concerned is that as long as you start by saying "one minute" when pronouncing the length of the video, it's all good. So anything from 60 seconds (one minute) to 119 seconds (one minute and fifty-nine seconds). Ironically, my only off-format video is the supply and demand one which is a second or two too short, heh
@@OneMinuteEconomics intersting, thanks for such a measured response considering my initial comment came off pretty prickish lol, thats interesting though esp as someone whos looking to start a podcast/channel in the coming year
also as a HUGE fan of Freakanomics as a teenager like 15yrs ago and recently read their application of game theory to penalty kicks in soccer, if u have any videos applying economic/statistical analysis to everyday/random situations id love to check them out :)
Keep telling myself I'll publish a statistics mini-series where I dig deep(er) one of these days, but my schedule has been a mess in 2022 (not necessarily in a bad way)
For now, I'd recommend checking out my statistics playlist. Mostly just me covering the basics, but with some interesting (I hope) analogies like family reunions for explaining the standard deviation:
ruclips.net/p/PLhICud5IUwViF1ibxxm98lEmOlsslI3i_
This is some top-notch content. I read a book with a similar topic, and it was absolutely incredible. "Game Theory and the Pursuit of Algorithmic Fairness" by Jack Frostwell
Why would a justice system convict two people to jailtime consisting of a percentage of the crime being done? Either you did the crime (100%) or you did not do the crime (0%), right?
how does it apply to economic?
It's basically a (very popular) example of a situation where competitors are in a state of Nash equilibrium:
ruclips.net/video/MSxgzaeKCJ0/видео.html
Golden Balls the game show is an interesting display of this
Will check it out :)
@@OneMinuteEconomics Then, look up "the weirdest split of steal ever" once you're familiar with the show. Dude broke the show and Prisoner's Dilemma
Alice would get a more lenient sentence.
People will cooperate if possible.
I’m here from danganronpa when Celeste mentioned this
this place described in better
Got it
Happy to hear that :)
The Police can NOT offer you a deal !
cuz we dont live in a simulation we live in the real world
Don't tell Elon :D
Why is the tile declared as 1 minute whereas , the video is 1.29 minutes or 1.5 minutes ? Have to be honest with your description
As a general rule, I am comfortable format-wise as long as you can say the length out loud and it starts with "One Minute"... even "one minute and fifty-nine seconds" as an extreme example. That way, I have enough wiggle room to be able to focus on getting the message across properly and don't have to sacrifice ideas that I consider worth including just for the sake of an overly-rigid format interpretation :)
Outstanding content! If you’re riveted by this, a parallel book is highly advisable. "Game Theory and the Pursuit of Algorithmic Fairness" by Jack Frostwell
How that's not the ideal outcome? Yeah technically Alice not testifying is better, but let's face it in real world situation what if her partner actually rats her and in that case she is 100% sure she will get 8 years imprisonment. So you can't blame Alice
Where does 8 years. Come from
Well women get 66 less sentencing than men so lets run the numbers again
I am not self interested
The funny part about this scenario is both of them are innocent. Welcome to the United States of America vs every citizen
This is more than one minute.
Title is objectively wrong.
Expooooooooosed :D It's always difficult to find the right balance between the one minute concept and covering the topic properly. The compromise I ended up landing at is this: if you start with "one minute" when pronouncing the length of the video (so anything from 60 to 119 seconds, or if you will anything from one minute to one minute and fifty-nine seconds, heh), it's all good
But he is mathematically right because 1.29 seconds is neither taken as 1 min or 2 minutes unless its more than 1 min 30 seconds. but he could have said " in less than 2 minutes"
SATURDAY APRIL 17,2021 0518HRS
Somebody's comment about an Oathkeeper taking a plea deal in his role in The January 6,2021 Capitol Riots brought me here.
The prisoner's dilemma is not analagous 5o the real world. can anyone think of a 1:1 situation for real life??
Performance enhancing drugs in sports. If neither athlete uses them, then they only have their naturally existing performance advantages over each other, and they avoid the health risks of drugging. If one drugs and the other doesn't, the one who drugs gets an performance advantage by doing so. But if they both use performance enhancing drugs, neither gets an advantage over the other, and they both incur the health risks for no realized gain.
@@carultch Sure, but what about the company that manufactures the drug? The executives? the shareholders? the employees? Can we have some compassion here?
common sense actually....
"1 year in jail each" - Alice will NEVER get the same sentence on account of female privilege
I wonder if that cooperation holds outside of country lines. People are very tribalistic.
Even within country lines, it's not set in stone :)