I liked the movie today on game theory and the Nash equilibrium. It is an interesting concept and i like how he put it into understandable terms with the girls in the bar. However, i don't know if he said it or not or if it said it somewhere in the book, but it still seems unrealistic. Like with perfect competition, it is the perfect way for the economy to function but it is highly impractical. For Nash's idea to be correct, (the idea that all the friends would block each other out if they all went for the blond) he is assuming that all the friends would prefer the blond over the others, and also that the blond would want all of them equally, and not be able to choose. However, in real life, this is not realistic, but maybe he wasn't using people as the best example. Because with people, the blond would not have an equal preference for all of the guys. And the idea that they should all go for other ones is assuming that all the guys are equal. If you were a stud and a nice guy, you wuold have an obvious advantage and would not have to follow the "Game Theory." In economic terms, this would mean that all the items being dealt with would have to have all identical properties with identical demands, as well as all the people dealing with the group would have to have the same preferences.
Here's the clip from "A Beautiful Mind"
http://youtube.com/watch?v=0JDoQb6A2YI
4 comments:
As I attempt to set the bar high with this first post, we've got to realize that Nash's theory is not actively used today in dating services, but in economics. yeah, the problems you're showing make sense, but the blond example isn't a perfect example, the clip only tries to show a couple concepts:
If more than one person tries to achieve the best ultimate goal, they will often 'block' each other, resulting in a loss for the group. This result of the group 'blocking' each other is worse for the group than if they trusted each other and stayed out of each others' ways. Again, in economics, it's more clear because you're dealing with dollars, a bit easier to judge than good looks.
Wow, so basically you're saying that beautiful people have the edge and don't have to follow the rest of the rules!
haha anyway I really liked this clip too, but as you and phil pointed out it definitely has it's flaws. It's much easier when you're dealing with dollars and/or tangible products or services. This way you can see whether or not they're identical very easily and nobody gets the uppper hand.
I definately agree that you run into problems when you try to assume how people will interact or set their views and priorities. In Nash equilibrium problems with people it seems like you have to really reduce people down to simple, tangible objects in order to understand and not overthink the problem.
haha yeah, don't worry i know what you were saying josh. I was trying to be sarcastic, kinda forgetting that doesn't always come across without a voice.
Post a Comment