๐งต View Thread
๐งต Thread (98 tweets)
@lisatomic5 https://t.co/qoYpGnOEpT
@lisatomic5 Wow, I did not expect these results. Both pills are stable equilibria; if everyone picks the same pill, everyone lives, regardless of which pill it is. But picking blue involves personal risk while picking red doesn't, so I figured red would be the Schelling point.
@IsaacKing314 @lisatomic5 Isnโt it the opposite? I just picked blue bc I want everyone to live lol but reasoning Iโd reason โif a single person doesnโt pick red then at least a person dies so the only way to save everyone is to pick blueโ
@slimepriestess @lisatomic5 @Aella_Girl The blue voters are the ones testing the moral sense of the others, and they're also the ones who think they're having their moral sense tested. When in reality, no one at all has to put themselves in danger.
@lisatomic5 i should switch my answer from red to blue though on the grounds that i would rather remove dumb people who think that they're saving their own skin at someone else's expense from the gene pool than dumb people who think they're saving other people's skin at their own expense
@goblinodds @lisatomic5 Choosing red is only optimal if we assume that we are not in a diverse series of iterative games where altruistic behavior may save both our asses in the future. Keneysian Beauty Contest mashed up with multiplayer ultimatum game. So cool. https://t.co/3K32ypoyjG
@vgr @ExGenesis It's a big one! But seems less well known unless you come from economics backgroundhttps://t.co/Y0C5bHwBqTI think it has analogs with the Keynesian beauty contest but haven't found any solid examples. https://t.co/BvVL2ZBQcMhttps://t.co/0TFHkn9IHK
@goblinodds @lisatomic5 The modern world has tricked us into being shelfish actors because it makes us easier to extinguish IMHO.https://t.co/C4B96e6USK
@CaminaDr @Doggomuffin1 @ConceptualJames I see this all the time in animal behavioral studies. We compare kids and chimp behavior together while neglecting that the children are playing a larger iterative game, and the chimps know they will just get put back in their cages to do another trial the next day.
@goblinodds @lisatomic5 The 'correct' move is not to play.https://t.co/hW6fbvaXMD
@goblinodds @lisatomic5 It's a trap. We're all prisoners.https://t.co/NmfiEip9Cy
@xlr8harder @eigenrobot @acidshill I see this shit all the time, people using game theory arguments to convince others that a game is an iterated prisoner's dilemma. when it's really actually a publics goods game.I'm convinced that knowing game theory is a trap.
@goblinodds @lisatomic5 People confused bayes optimal decisions and maximizing utility with there being "one true good answer" when really the answer is often a shifting mix of Schelling points and chaos when looking at it from a metagame.https://t.co/XTI9tJe7Ed
@goblinodds @lisatomic5 Maybe the best we can do is minimize losses.https://t.co/4gtX2SdyLw
@goblinodds @lisatomic5 start putting cats in boxes and funny things happen https://t.co/oUfQokBB9B
@goblinodds @lisatomic5 If you don't take any pill, there is no chance of dying.So the choice really is "do I take the blue pill to save people who took the blue pill from the red, do I take red as I am going along with the herd and want to live, or do I take none and let them decide their own fate"
@ultimape @lisatomic5 this would mean most of people's arguments are moot and the real divide is: A) do you want to risk your life just for the thrill of it (blue) B) do you want to risk your life for people who want to risk their lives just for the thrill of it--
@goblinodds @lisatomic5 E) do you chose D knowing most will vote B, so that A can have a good time.F) choosing E so maybe in doing so you can find out who's leaving all these weird quantum box pills around and maybe get them to stop.
@goblinodds @lisatomic5 I voted red. I am extremely selfish in nature and wanted to choose to not take the pill at all; but realized that I wanted to play the signaling game of appearing to at least save some people without risking my own life.I hope blue wins tho.
@goblinodds @lisatomic5 I see the game and play another cuz I think it's funny.https://t.co/BwUxzzeulo
@goblinodds @lisatomic5 yes! it's as spectrum for sure. The higher up the status hierarchy you go, the more this works out in your favor.It's only dominant in the context of how resources are spread thinly.https://t.co/e5xie5iQtq
@stahura @ZPostFacto @sama Larger philosophical issue w/ these stances is that in signaling a desire to have another lower their guard, it can make them easier to victimize due to information asymmetry among a mixed-motive-imperfect-information game.It works well for peers, but advantages those w/ power.
@goblinodds @lisatomic5 The people at rand got really mad when the plebs didn't play the game "right".https://t.co/1SNyZT0f5G
@ultimape @goblinodds @lisatomic5 Choosing blue isn't altruistic, though - everybody has the opportunity to choose red, and remove themselves from risk entirely. Blue is an altruism illusion, it's self-sacrifice for the sake of self-sacrifice.
@12josdic @goblinodds @lisatomic5 It's fun to explore the role of the amygdala in social behaviors. Shows up a lot in autism research.https://t.co/g19FQdDZqJAlso worth noting that modeling why there are shifts in responses is often missing in exploring these kinds of games.https://t.co/34UhtYdhSN
@ultimape @goblinodds @lisatomic5 For the record, I think I agree that blue is the correct choice - but only because I know that in reality not everybody is a perfect rational economic game theory agent, and I don't think that people deserve to die for making silly mistakes in games.
@12josdic @goblinodds @lisatomic5 I linked to something in tweet earlier, it mentions an economic game that economists typically fail at as they try to model it. They all vote to go to zero. It's like a neurosis among subgroups.https://t.co/0TFHkn9IHK
Whoa, the collectivist model of the market failure is a near perfect extension of Yanis' "investment game" he describes here: https://t.co/HQ4djv3OMBAmazing what pops out when I start thinking about selling stickers on the open market and how tech companies are chasing fads.
@12josdic @goblinodds @lisatomic5 Once someone chooses blue, it *becomes* altruistic to choose blue.https://t.co/rzJ1ooGbA6
@12josdic @goblinodds @lisatomic5 Assuming no one chooses blue also assumes that this is a perfect information game with no noise.As results are hidden and someone could have clicked blue on accident, ergodicity comes into play.Chaos guides the hands of fate.https://t.co/GCHI7ShhWm
@12josdic @goblinodds @lisatomic5 "These results improve our understanding of the bidirectional role body-brain interactions play in social decision-making and why humans at times act "irrationally" according to standard economic theory."https://t.co/TbAWCybGEb
Wait till you find out that, because it manifests in an ultimatum game, it also involves loosely mapping impact of population wide shifts in tyrosine/dopamine via gut health factors. Having infections with T Gondii may impact outcomes.https://t.co/3cEMO5uPpJ https://t.co/P6r8oJ5naZ
@RokoMijic @lisatomic5 The key is to understand not what is the โcorrectโ answer, but the answer that will MOST LIKELY be chosen by the other people that you donโt have control over. The poll utterly proves this. Sorry, but blue is the best choice to vote for.
@RokoMijic @lisatomic5 This poll shows what you see. You see (correctly but narrowly) if you choose red, you live. The majority sees (correctly but widely) if they choose blue together, nobody dies. Red sees "I live" and Blue sees "Nobody dies."
@RokoMijic @lisatomic5 because humans judge each other on ethics and loyalty and are transparent to each other and so the meta-game results are actually flipped: blue pushers live in high trust groups of other blues and reds die mad and alone all my homies push the blue button fr fr
@RokoMijic @lisatomic5 costly signaling of loyalty and altruism is basically the main driver of social psychology along with horniness red-red is a good Nash eq for this isolated game but the meta game is that no one wants to be friends with clever dudes who "well ackshuyally" about Nash equilibria
@RokoMijic @yashkaf @lisatomic5 part of my intuition could be translated as, "at least half of us will cooperate, saving any poor souls who weren't sharp enough to spot the safe equilibrium" you want the default-altruistic heuristic because the default-selfish one leads to terrible equilibria
@RokoMijic @yashkaf @lisatomic5 Protect the people that will make mistakes https://t.co/0Ul4zstqNx
@RokoMijic @lisatomic5 Being willing to take risk for the well-being of others is a good thing. Imagine living in a world where everyone picks red, content to see blue die because it minimised personal risk.
@lisatomic5 https://t.co/uOPBtApsZo
ok, one final poll. There is a room-sized blender that kills everyone who steps into it. But, if 50% or more of the people answering this poll step into the blender, there will be too much resistance and it will fail to start and everyone who steps in will be fine. Obviously, if you don't step into the blender nothing bad can happen. Do you step into the blender?
@RokoMijic @lisatomic5 the interesting distinction between this poll & the blender is in this one itโs saying โif you choose red, you are responsible for the death of everyone who chooses blueโ. Most would rather die than live with the guilt of knowing they killed all the altruists by being selfish.
@lisatomic5 To the "Schelling point is Red" bros: yeah, that's Smart and Correct, but do you really want to live in a society where kindness is conditioned on smartness, i.e. if someone isn't smart, then they aren't kind? ๐
@lisatomic5 It's cruel to vote Blue in this example because you risk getting Blue over 50% and depriving the people who voted for death their wish. (the test "works" for its implied purpose if there are some number of non-voters who will also not get the Red vote protection)
@lisatomic5 seeing problems like this and going "what is the most rational choice" instead of "which outcome is most likely (assuming that most people aren't acting rationally)" feels like a potentially catastrophic disregard of human behaviour
With perfect coordination, the answer is obvious; everyone pushes the red button at the same time. We don't live in that world. Many people, certainly billions, would instinctively choose blue, believing it to be the moral choice. Thus, if you choose red, billions die. The tension lies in knowing that red is the optimal choice with coordination and that it carries no personal risk. But it *does* carry a risk: that your choice of red will result in the deaths of billions of people. One of the reasons I would choose blue is that the world where we killed all of the 'blues' for making a suboptimal choice would be a much worse world to live in than this one. TL;DR - In the end the question is simple: 'Am I my brother's keeper?' And for me, the answer is easy. Yes I am.
@lisatomic5 Voted red, even though I thought people would vote blue. In a large poll, Iโm highly unlikely to be the difference-maker, and I had enough uncertainty about the votes so I went red to be safe. If red had been ahead, blue would be a meaningless suicide.
@lisatomic5 Let me take just another stab at the Red-pill bros, come on now: https://t.co/Ww0LFlAItZ
Red: 100% of people have to pick it, for 100% of people to live. Any less than 100% of people picking it results in a LOT of death. Even if 99% of people pick it, a ton of people end up dying. Blue: Only 50% of people have to pick it, for 100% of people to live. If you have zero control over what other people pick, and if you are trying to minimize the odds of ANYONE dying, then blue is the right choice.
@lisatomic5 https://t.co/Ovtbty9tQf
