Prisoner’s dilemma: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{prisonersdilemmatable}}
{{prisonersdilemmatable}}
An exercise in calculating economic outcomes by means of {{tag|metaphor}}.
An exercise in calculating economic outcomes by means of {{tag|metaphor}}.  
 
Two people are  charged with a conspiracy<ref>Whether or not they are guilty is beside the point. If it helps you empathise with their predicament, assume they’re innocent</ref>.  Each is held separately. They cannot communicate. There  is enough evidence to convict both on a lesser charge, but not the main charge. Each prisoner is separately offered the same plea bargain. The offer is:
Two people are  charged with a conspiracy<ref>Whether or not they are guilty is beside the point. If it helps you empathise with their predicament, assume they’re innocent</ref>.  Each is held separately. They cannot communicate. There  is enough evidence to convict both on a lesser charge, but not the main charge. Each prisoner is separately offered the same plea bargain. The offer is:
*If A informs B but B refuses to inform on A:
*If A informs B but B refuses to inform on A:
Line 12: Line 11:
**A will get 1 year in prison  (on the lesser charge).
**A will get 1 year in prison  (on the lesser charge).
**B will get 1 year in prison (on the lesser charge).
**B will get 1 year in prison (on the lesser charge).
The [[prisoner’s dilemma]] is a thought process which replicates the incentives present when participants buy or sell in the market.


===[[single round prisoner’s dilemma]]===
===[[single round prisoner’s dilemma]]===
If you play this game in isolation the payoff is grim:
If you play this game in isolation the payoff is grim: if you cooperate you get reamed. Your best interest is in informing on the other guy, because ''his'' best interest is in forming on ''you''.


This look


{{seealso}}  
{{seealso}}  

Revision as of 13:31, 23 July 2018

Pay-off table

A cooperates

A defects

B cooperates

A gets 1 year
B gets 1 year

A goes free
B gets 3 years

B defects

A gets 3 years
B goes free

A gets 2 years
B gets 2 years

An exercise in calculating economic outcomes by means of metaphor. Two people are charged with a conspiracy[1]. Each is held separately. They cannot communicate. There is enough evidence to convict both on a lesser charge, but not the main charge. Each prisoner is separately offered the same plea bargain. The offer is:

  • If A informs B but B refuses to inform on A:
    • A will not be prosecuted at all and will go free
    • B will be convicted of the main charge and will get 3 years in prison.
  • If A informs B and B informs on A:
    • A will get 2 years in prison
    • B will get 2 years in prison
  • If A refuses to inform on B and B refuses to inform on A:
    • A will get 1 year in prison (on the lesser charge).
    • B will get 1 year in prison (on the lesser charge).

The prisoner’s dilemma is a thought process which replicates the incentives present when participants buy or sell in the market.



single round prisoner’s dilemma

If you play this game in isolation the payoff is grim: if you cooperate you get reamed. Your best interest is in informing on the other guy, because his best interest is in forming on you.

This look

See also

References

  1. Whether or not they are guilty is beside the point. If it helps you empathise with their predicament, assume they’re innocent