[CrackMonkey] Re: A cool problem

[Seth David Schoen]

On Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 09:33:15PM -0800, Monkey Master wrote:
> begin  Seth David Schoen quotation:
> > > 	The only conversation is "We all answer RED!".
> > 
> > But that's not enough to convince other people that this is an
> > optimal strategy.
> 
> 	The problem wasn't one of diplomacy.

OK, but this seems like cheating to me.  The problem asks for a strategy
which is guaranteed to save as many people as possible.

This strategy _isn't even followed_ in the form in which it's supposed to
be presented; it's based on a different conclusion which is supposedly
reached in a hypothetical rational interior monologue which may or may
not happen at all.  Metarational reciprocity, anyone? :-) :-)

And the strategy is not guaranteed to save anyone, because the claim
that it saves everyone is based on a very strong and unwarranted
assumption about the limitations of the adversary.

You're using a model of the adversary as a computer program who takes
a well-defined deterministic strategy-function and uses it to come up
with an adversarial arrangement by brute force.  But you're also using
a model of the humans as people who take a well-defined deterministic
strategy-function and all unanimously, spontaneously, and as a result
of some rationale completely inaccessible to the adversary, _ignore it_
and do the exact opposite!

> > If this behavior of "anyone with half a brain" is based on exposure
> > to your argument, why hasn't the adversary been exposed to your
> > argument?
> > 
> > If this behavior is based on human nature or natural reason, why
> > would the adversary be unaware of it?
> 
> 	Because you yourself said that the adversary would use what
> was decided upon in order to maximize killing.  You never said that
> the adversary would use eavesdropping *and* common sense.

Well, in what sense was "we all answer red" actually "decided upon" if
nobody actually intends to _do_ it?

-- 
Seth David Schoen <schoen at loyalty.org>  | And do not say, I will study when I
Temp.  http://www.loyalty.org/~schoen/  | have leisure; for perhaps you will
down:  http://www.loyalty.org/   (CAF)  | not have leisure.  -- Pirke Avot 2:5