![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The Traveler's Dilemma has inspired me to create this Parasite Dilemma. I wonder if it's an innovation or if someone else has already invented it. If it's an innovation you saw it first here on SMP.
The Parasite Dilemma -------------------- You are part of a group of 100 people. Each person in the group writes down on a piece of paper their decision whether to be a Contributor to the Group or a Parasite on the Group. The Operator of the experiment will add $100 to the Group's Treasury for every Group Contributor. For every Parasite on the Group, $200 will be subtracted from the Group Treasury, which may go into debt. Each Contibutor gets 1 Share and each Parasite gets 2 Shares in the Treasury. The Treasury is then divided amongst the Contributors and Parasites according to their Shares in the Treasury. If the Treasury is positive each Parasite will recieve twice as much of the proceeds as each Contributor. On the other hand, if the Treasury is in Debt each Parasite must pay out twice as much as each Contributor to pay off the Debt. What is your decision? Do you decide to Contribute to the Group or be a Parasite? There is also a NonDebt version of the Dilemma where the Treasury cannot fall below zero. What is you decision in the NonDebt Version? PairTheBoard |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The Contributors band together and eliminate the Parasites.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
The Contributors band together and eliminate the Parasites. [/ QUOTE ] Don't be a Parasite on the Thread. PairTheBoard |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] The Contributors band together and eliminate the Parasites. [/ QUOTE ] Don't be a Parasite on the Thread. PairTheBoard [/ QUOTE ] Actually I was being a Contributor. For cooperation, altruism, etc. to work in social animals there needs to be a way to detect cheats and Parasites, and to ostracise or eliminate them. But to clarify for posters in this thread, PTB is talking about a kind of multiplayer, but one-off, Prisoner's Dilemma, and I am talking about an iterated version of it. But I won't iterate my comments in case you get iteration irritation. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] The Contributors band together and eliminate the Parasites. [/ QUOTE ] Don't be a Parasite on the Thread. PairTheBoard [/ QUOTE ] Actually I was being a Contributor. For cooperation, altruism, etc. to work in social animals there needs to be a way to detect cheats and Parasites, and to ostracise or eliminate them. But to clarify for posters in this thread, PTB is talking about a kind of multiplayer, but one-off, Prisoner's Dilemma, and I am talking about an iterated version of it. But I won't iterate my comments in case you get iteration irritation. [/ QUOTE ] Exactly why I created and want to look at this Dilemma rather than the well known iterated prisoner's dilemma. By removing the easy answer I think the Parasite Dilemma isolates a concept that has been elluding us. PairTheBoard |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
What do we know of the group of 100?
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
You are all motivated to make money. [/ QUOTE ] If this is the only known information, I'm going with contributor. Whatever the case, I don't think there's going to be much money in the fund. Interesting stipulation: is there any record of the choices individuals made after the fact? If yes, are participants aware of this beforehand? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
Interesting stipulation: is there any record of the choices individuals made after the fact? [/ QUOTE ] No. So no peer pressure is involved. PairTheBoard |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
note: u only wanna go parasite if 31 or less people go parasite...so it's <1/3 as the cutoff point
if 32 go parasite, 67 go contributor...now my choice: i go parasite: 6700-6600=100; 33*2+67=133 shares 2/133 * 100 = $1.50 for me i go contributor: 6800-6400=400; 32*2+68=132 shares 1/132 * 400 = $3.03 for me so it's <=31, not <=1/3 that matters |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
note: u only wanna go parasite if 31 or less people go parasite...so it's <1/3 as the cutoff point if 32 go parasite, 67 go contributor...now my choice: i go parasite: 6700-6600=100; 33*2+67=133 shares 2/133 * 100 = $1.50 for me i go contributor: 6800-6400=400; 32*2+68=132 shares 1/132 * 400 = $3.03 for me so it's <=31, not <=1/3 that matters [/ QUOTE ] Regardless, you don't know what everybody else is going to do. That's what makes it a game. The question remains, what do you do? I suspect the correct game theory answer is to randomize your choice. Give yourself 1/3 chance to pick Parasite and 2/3 chance to pick Contributor. If that's correct, and everybody does that then Game Theory ensures an average result of Break Even for everybody. I believe this shows Game Theory to be lacking in some kind of Rationality which has probably not yet been well defined by the professional Theoreticians. Clearly, everyone does better if they all reject Game Theory and decide to be Contributors. I think this is more than just a theoretical curiousity. It goes to the heart of a lot of phenomenon which allow society to work better than game theory predicts. I also think it is a mistake to blindly promote the mentality of the parasite as logically superior - something I see as almost a given for many on this Forum. While looking out for self interest is important, there can also be benefits to supporting the dynamics of the Group. In my view a Balance between the two is the healthy operating perspective. Extremism in favor of the Group can lead to self destructive fanaticism, while Extremism in favor of self interest can lead to the life of the criminal or sociopath. PairTheBoard |
![]() |
|
|