Game Shows And Game Theory
There's a British game show called Golden Balls in which two contestants play a game similar to the Prisoner's Dilemma. The prize of the pot varies by week but each contestant can choose whether to split the pot or steal the pot. They're given two balls, one says steal, one says split. If both choose to "split," they split. If both choose to "steal," they get nothing. And if one chooses "steal," he wins the whole pot and the other player, who chose "split," gets nothing.
What makes this different from a classic Prisoner's Dilemma is that prior to making their pick, they get a few minutes to talk to each other and make claims about what they're going to do.
First, let's see this in action:
Now, I have another video I want to show you featuring another episode of this show. But before I do that, I am very curious to find out what your strategy would be if you played this game.
- Comment (47)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (8)
Comments:
Aug '10
Re: Game Shows And Game Theory
Uttering threats on national television.
I think I see a slight flaw in your strategy...
May '10
Re: Game Shows And Game Theory
Strategy depends upon predictability. Individual human beings contain so many dynamics within themselves, let alone differences between each other, that it's amazing that our strategies succeed at all with so many necessary assumptions.
Mar '11
Re: Game Shows And Game Theory
All, do watch the second video all the way to the very last second, when Ibrahim says what he's going to do with his money. And watch the other guy's face.
Nov '10
Re: Game Shows And Game Theory
My strategy would be to build up an immunity to iocaine powder...
Apr '11
Re: Game Shows And Game Theory
I find this entire topic to be distasteful. I'm against gambling or 'gaming' of any kind because it encourages lust to get something for nothing. In other words it is sinful. It is not a valid response to say it is not for nothing, it is for one's skill in reasoning or deception, because there is no underlying value behind the game itself. It is the obverse of the principle that Scooter Libby should not have been charged with perjury in a case with no underlying crime. Here, there is nothing of value underlying the game even in the best scenario: both players agree to split. Do you expect to be rewarded for being decent. Someone famously said he he didn’t want to be praised for not being a thief.
One should refuse to play games of this sort. It is immoral. It is as degrading as the Choice forced on Sophie. Would the people in this conversation also enjoy advising Sophie how she should rationally try to maximize her winnings?
Apr '11
Re: Game Shows And Game Theory
[comment split due to 200 word limit]
Your wife and your child are both drowning, and you know you only have the ability to save one. Which one? You would not wish such a tragedy on your worst enemy, so why put that on TV?
A TV show like this is as immoral as the Roman gladiators in the Colosseum.
David Kreps wrote above, about his Stanford students, “Even in a one-shot game, they cooperate (split) at least 80% of the time, because they have to live with the "reputation" this creates. “
One’s honor is worth a price beyond rubies.
The key to commerce in a free society is not regulation, merely transparency.
Nov '10
Re: Game Shows And Game Theory
I am with Charlie in Kobe on this one.