The most racist attack I've seen in politics all year (not Presidential campaign)

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by Explorer, Oct 28, 2016.

  1. narad

    narad SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    4,816
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK
    Yea, but I'm not in the math discussion subforum and these game-theoretic terms quickly describe dynamics that ..jeez, probably would have taken all of three sentences to write out and qualify. Certainly now that I've spent 10 minutes qualifying my usage, I really regret trying to save 10 seconds by not writing it out in the first place.

    Oh, I don't? Yea... I guess I technically don't have a degree in math, but only because I never filed the paperwork for it. If I fill out the form can we argue toe-to-toe?

    Like look, people use game-theoretic labels outside of board games and card games all the time, even though in perhaps none of these instances do these labels accurately capture the entirety of the system without exception. Am I wrong to label a competitive win-lose scenario as zero-sum? I don't think so. We're having a discussion not writing an academic paper. But sure, if you're going to grab onto that like some rabid-autistic dog and shake at every exception, sure, it's a label that does not describe the entirety of economics and it does not even wholly the economic dynamic of the world at that time, sure, you are correct.

    We can all do this nit-picking. For instance,

    Imperfect information? Imperfect information has nothing to do with classification as zero-sum. Do you even know math!?

    So let's strike that from your statement. "Imperfect risk" - I don't know what is meant there. So are you saying "nonzero equilibrium literally means not zero sum?" because frankly if you have a degree in it I thought we could move a bit further away from tautologies.

    Is doing that helpful? No. I'm not a compiler - I get your point. You got my point (I think) before trying to drudge down a lesson in game theory that wasn't at all important to the point I was making and had to restate over and over.

    If you have anything to say to refute that postwar vacuums in the marketplace (and the US's less-affected status positioned it advantageously to fill that role) didn't significantly assist in the US's rise to an economic superpower, then totally post that. But anyone quibbling over game theory definitions -- that's the dead horse. And that horse shouldn't even be in this thread. Very little has been said to directly address / explain the US's postwar economic progress (don't care about Russia's - thanks though).
     
  2. USMarine75

    USMarine75 Doc McStuffins Contributor

    Messages:
    3,072
    Likes Received:
    642
    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2010
    Location:
    DC/VA
    Yes. 100%. Completely.

    Yup. Me. And everyone else in economics.

    Nope. You win at math and life. Please teach me. I should take notes. Would you rather write on the back of my Harvard masters in physics with a minor in math? Or my medical doctorate? :lol:

    I did. And I posted links to back me up.

    Tl;Dr "The Zero-Sum Fallacy. ... A logical fallacy often occurs when this particular game theory is applied to economic or political discussions amongst non-economists – leading to false beliefs that the amount of wealth or jobs in the economy is fixed."

    Oh well not coming back to this thread, because your lack of understanding and usage of complex terms you obviously dont understand is giving me a headache.
    So, congratulations on your superior knowledge and winning.
     
  3. narad

    narad SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    4,816
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK
    Hey - not bad!

    You posted links about Russian WWII losses, blog posts about the general inapplicability of zero-sum to general economics, and some game theory wikipedia pages. Was that what I was asking for or is that relevant to my point about the US? No.

    Fine by me, man. If you're going to refer to zero-sum/non-zero-sum as a complex term, I think you were mis-judging everyone's intelligence to begin with. I'm sure most people who (regrettably) wander into this thread can understand the concept 100%.
     
  4. narad

    narad SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    4,816
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK
  5. bostjan

    bostjan MicroMetal Contributor

    Messages:
    12,972
    Likes Received:
    1,140
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Location:
    St. Johnsbury, VT USA
    The people that study game theory don't study board games! :lol:

    Game theory is a branch of mathematics that applies to economics.

    The name "game theory" can easily mislead people into thinking it has something to do with the study of video games or board games or card games or whatnot, but that's not accurate.

    It'd be like if the people who studied physics spent their time studying the physics of 3D game engines, instead of the laws of nature.

    As for the average SS.O user not knowing mathematics, I think you might be a little off. There are plenty of guys on here with advanced degrees in economics, mathematics, engineering, and physics. Maybe if you fill out the paperwork, you can join the club. You'll save money on insurance in the US. I'm not sure about Japan or the UK, though, but possibly the same. But, on the other hand, you might take offense when folks try to argue with you about mathematics, and you try to explain a term or a concept to them and they throw it back in your face whilst bringing up that your advanced degree and all of the training and stressful exams that it took to achieve it is just a meaningless piece of paper.
     
  6. narad

    narad SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    4,816
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK
    Ha, I mean that game theory comes up a lot in artificial intelligence, and traditional AI where people were concerned with the notion of optimal play, relates closely to nash equilibrium. These were often studied in the domain of board games, namely chess and go.


    On the contrary -- I was saying that a lot of SSO users know a good amount of mathematics, and could easily grasp the concepts being bounced around in this thread, even if maybe the terminology was initially unfamiliar to them.

    Hey, I'm the last guy to have anything against higher education. I just think that sometimes in life you use a term and you want all the baggage that goes with it. Science and formal pursuits are like that. You would never expect a term to mean anything less that its complete and exact definition when writing a proof or program. However, sometimes in less formal domains -- like chatting on a guitar forum -- you just want to use it to convey some core chunk of meaning. In doing the latter in this thread, well, it was not taken that way.
     

Share This Page