[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: Reconciliation? [formerly "Re: apologies"]
From:       James Richard Tyrer <tyrerj () acm ! org>
Date:       2008-06-14 9:35:06
Message-ID: 485390CA.1040603 () acm ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

Mark A. Taff wrote:
> On Friday 13 June 2008 18:45:27 Matthew Woehlke wrote:
>> In an emotionally-charged conversation, it's easy to read animosity
>> where none was intended, sometimes when where none was present. That's
>> why IMO the strategy you (Mark) cite above is the WORST possible
>> strategy in such a situation. I'm curious, actually, under what
>> circumstances you feel that strategy is "highly effective". (I'm
>> assuming that your intention is *not* to troll ;-).)
> 
> Matthew: Tit for tat is a strategy from game theory.  You can check out 
> wikipedia for an overview:
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tit_for_tat
> 
And if you read the article you will see that there are problems if both 
sides use the tit for tat strategy.  Specifically, neither side gains an 
advantage and they both gain less than if they had always both cooperated.

The contingencies of reinforcement in the Prisoner's Dilemma can be 
changed and this does affect the outcome of various strategies. 
However, mutual cooperation always results in the greatest total gain.

-- 
JRT
 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]