Bitcoin Forum
December 09, 2016, 11:30:24 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: The Ultimatum Game  (Read 16232 times)
fornit
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 989


View Profile
April 21, 2011, 02:29:21 PM
 #21

rationally, accepting the 10$ is the right choice in a totally isolated experiment. telling anyone that you would make a rational decision however, is not.
always appear like the 50/50 guy.
accepting 5000/0 is not rational btw. why would you care more about the greedy unknown person taking all the money than the unknown person offering it?

Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481326224
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481326224

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481326224
Reply with quote  #2

1481326224
Report to moderator
1481326224
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481326224

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481326224
Reply with quote  #2

1481326224
Report to moderator
NghtRppr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


View Profile
April 21, 2011, 03:31:01 PM
 #22

As you currently pose the scenario, I would derive more pleasure from watching the other person get nothing if they offered me less than somewhere around 40%. I expect exactly half but I will settle for slightly less in this case. My percentage changes depending on how much money is involved too. The lower the amount, the closer to exactly half I will demand. The higher the amount, the less I will demand. After all, 1% of a trillion dollars is still 10 billion dollars. I first heard this question posed at $100, in which case I want half or I can lose $50 to watch you do the same. If you are making the offer, it's wise to always offer half since that gives you the best chance to profit.

Anyone that says it's always rational to accept any offer is making the mistake of thinking that money is the only thing of human value. That's false. Money is a means to an end.

Jealous much?

Yes, I would gladly spend $10 to watch a bastard squirm. Got a problem with that?
tomcollins
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182


View Profile
April 21, 2011, 03:34:08 PM
 #23

As you currently pose the scenario, I would derive more pleasure from watching the other person get nothing if they offered me less than somewhere around 40%. I expect exactly half but I will settle for slightly less in this case. My percentage changes depending on how much money is involved too. The lower the amount, the closer to exactly half I will demand. The higher the amount, the less I will demand. After all, 1% of a trillion dollars is still 10 billion dollars. I first heard this question posed at $100, in which case I want half or I can lose $50 to watch you do the same. If you are making the offer, it's wise to always offer half since that gives you the best chance to profit.

Anyone that says it's always rational to accept any offer is making the mistake of thinking that money is the only thing of human value. That's false. Money is a means to an end.

You derive more pleasure from watching other people suffer than getting something on your own?  I would get that envy checked out.
NghtRppr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


View Profile
April 21, 2011, 03:36:19 PM
 #24

You derive more pleasure from watching other people suffer than getting something on your own?  I would get that envy checked out.

Thanks for your opinion, duly ignored.
tomcollins
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182


View Profile
April 21, 2011, 03:37:18 PM
 #25

You derive more pleasure from watching other people suffer than getting something on your own?  I would get that envy checked out.

Thanks for your opinion, duly ignored.

If I offered you $10 for free, would you accept?  Or would you require my Income Tax return to make sure I don't have too much money and that's a "lowball" offer.
NghtRppr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


View Profile
April 21, 2011, 03:41:16 PM
 #26

If I offered you $10 for free, would you accept?  Or would you require my Income Tax return to make sure I don't have too much money and that's a "lowball" offer.

What you make on your own doesn't concern me. What we are both offered and you get to distribute is a different story. They are only analogous if all you look at is the money. I'm sorry you don't like my values but there's nothing objectively superior about yours. It's purely subjective.

You should accept $0.01 only if you value revenge less than that. I don't.
barbarousrelic
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 675


View Profile
April 21, 2011, 03:58:56 PM
 #27

Essentially, it depends on your pride and your dollar value of spiting someone who insulted you.

The fact that people behave this way serves as an incentive for the person making the split to give you more than $.01.



I wouldn't accept less than $50.

Do not waste your time debating whether Bitcoin can work. It does work.

"Early adopters will profit" is not a sufficient condition to classify something as a pyramid or Ponzi scheme. If it was, Apple and Microsoft stock are Ponzi schemes.

There is no such thing as "market manipulation." There is only buying and selling.
Terpie
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 175



View Profile
April 21, 2011, 04:20:13 PM
 #28

If I offered you $10 for free, would you accept?  Or would you require my Income Tax return to make sure I don't have too much money and that's a "lowball" offer.

What you make on your own doesn't concern me. What we are both offered and you get to distribute is a different story. They are only analogous if all you look at is the money. I'm sorry you don't like my values but there's nothing objectively superior about yours. It's purely subjective.

You should accept $0.01 only if you value revenge less than that. I don't.

This man gets it. Call him stubborn, stupid, vengeful, etc., but you can't say he's being irrational.
ffe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 297



View Profile
April 21, 2011, 04:31:12 PM
 #29

In a one-shot game, there is never any purely financial incentive to reject whatever offer.  As I said, not even a 5000$/0$ one.

Not true. Many would pay a little to punish a jerk. 0$ sounds little enough for me. So does 10$. I don't know about $100. I'd go with the deal and mumble under my breath about jerks at $1000.
tomcollins
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182


View Profile
April 21, 2011, 05:06:07 PM
 #30

If I offered you $10 for free, would you accept?  Or would you require my Income Tax return to make sure I don't have too much money and that's a "lowball" offer.

What you make on your own doesn't concern me. What we are both offered and you get to distribute is a different story. They are only analogous if all you look at is the money. I'm sorry you don't like my values but there's nothing objectively superior about yours. It's purely subjective.

You should accept $0.01 only if you value revenge less than that. I don't.

You weren't both offered anything.  You were offered $10.  It does not affect you one bit what someone else was offered or what they offered to pass down to you.  It only matters if you are envious and vindictive.

Sure, there is nothing objectively superior to it.  But I subjectively find "revenge" due to envy pretty despicable.
tomcollins
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182


View Profile
April 21, 2011, 05:07:02 PM
 #31

Essentially, it depends on your pride and your dollar value of spiting someone who insulted you.

The fact that people behave this way serves as an incentive for the person making the split to give you more than $.01.



I wouldn't accept less than $50.

I'll ship you 20 bitcoins, you want them?
tomcollins
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182


View Profile
April 21, 2011, 05:11:29 PM
 #32

An interesting hypothetical to the spite-happy people.

My grandmother dies and leaves me $5000 inheritance.  You are my next-door neighbor.  You ask for some of the money.  I say "sure, I'm feeling nice here's $10".  Do you bash my $5000 car with a hammer because I didn't give you enough?
tomcollins
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182


View Profile
April 21, 2011, 05:15:23 PM
 #33

Also, there's actually a way to win as the receiver if there is communication.  If you can make a binding decision ahead of time, you could say "I will reject any offer less than $4990".  And if you violate that agreement, you are forced to donate twice the money you get to charity or something like that.  If my opponent is certain I will live up to my word, he'd be a fool to offer me anything less (unless he is the jealous spiteful type who will bash my car because I got an inheritance).  It's similar to playing chicken and removing your steering wheel and throwing it out the window and disconnecting the brakes.  Your opponent knows that you cannot possibly stop, so he has to either swerve or die.  You win every time your opponent does not disconnect his own brakes and steering wheel before you.
db
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 279



View Profile
April 21, 2011, 05:20:13 PM
 #34

rationally, accepting the 10$ is the right choice in a totally isolated experiment. telling anyone that you would make a rational decision however, is not.
always appear like the 50/50 guy.

Here Eliezer Yudkowsky argues well that it can be a rational to actually be the 50/50 guy:

http://lesswrong.com/lw/to/the_truly_iterated_prisoners_dilemma/
Terpie
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 175



View Profile
April 21, 2011, 05:22:28 PM
 #35

An interesting hypothetical to the spite-happy people.

My grandmother dies and leaves me $5000 inheritance.  You are my next-door neighbor.  You ask for some of the money.  I say "sure, I'm feeling nice here's $10".  Do you bash my $5000 car with a hammer because I didn't give you enough?

It's harder to think of a scenario that is less analogous to the game than this one. You're missing the point entirely.
tomcollins
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182


View Profile
April 21, 2011, 05:22:47 PM
 #36

rationally, accepting the 10$ is the right choice in a totally isolated experiment. telling anyone that you would make a rational decision however, is not.
always appear like the 50/50 guy.

Here Eliezer Yudkowsky argues well that it can be a rational to actually be the 50/50 guy:

http://lesswrong.com/lw/to/the_truly_iterated_prisoners_dilemma/

This is not the prisoners dilemma, since the only reason to defect is spite.
tomcollins
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182


View Profile
April 21, 2011, 05:23:26 PM
 #37

An interesting hypothetical to the spite-happy people.

My grandmother dies and leaves me $5000 inheritance.  You are my next-door neighbor.  You ask for some of the money.  I say "sure, I'm feeling nice here's $10".  Do you bash my $5000 car with a hammer because I didn't give you enough?

It's harder to think of a scenario that is less analogous to the game than this one. You're missing the point entirely.

How is it different?  Because in one case there is a "rightful" owner, and the first case, the money appears to be "shared" at one point in time?
Terpie
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 175



View Profile
April 21, 2011, 05:35:27 PM
 #38

An interesting hypothetical to the spite-happy people.

My grandmother dies and leaves me $5000 inheritance.  You are my next-door neighbor.  You ask for some of the money.  I say "sure, I'm feeling nice here's $10".  Do you bash my $5000 car with a hammer because I didn't give you enough?

It's harder to think of a scenario that is less analogous to the game than this one. You're missing the point entirely.

How is it different?  Because in one case there is a "rightful" owner, and the first case, the money appears to be "shared" at one point in time?

Well, I can't respond for anyone else. I can only give you my opinion and subjective values. And besides, this is somewhat of a red herring to the fact that rejecting an offer in the game is not irrational under any circumstances.

Anyways, I personally would find that:

1. You have a legal claim to the entirety of the funds
2. You are not obligated to make any offer to me
3. You are not receiving the funds under the condition that I accept a one-time offer that you are obligated to make

So no, I wouldn't personally smash your car. I would reject your $10 offer in the game. I'd find that the marginal utility of $10 to me financially is worth much less than the opportunity to give you a lesson that cooperation and negotiation is an important social skill.
tomcollins
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182


View Profile
April 21, 2011, 05:37:57 PM
 #39

An interesting hypothetical to the spite-happy people.

My grandmother dies and leaves me $5000 inheritance.  You are my next-door neighbor.  You ask for some of the money.  I say "sure, I'm feeling nice here's $10".  Do you bash my $5000 car with a hammer because I didn't give you enough?

It's harder to think of a scenario that is less analogous to the game than this one. You're missing the point entirely.

How is it different?  Because in one case there is a "rightful" owner, and the first case, the money appears to be "shared" at one point in time?

Well, I can't respond for anyone else. I can only give you my opinion and subjective values. And besides, this is somewhat of a red herring to the fact that rejecting an offer in the game is not irrational under any circumstances.

Anyways, I personally would find that:

1. You have a legal claim to the entirety of the funds
2. You are not obligated to make any offer to me
3. You are not receiving the funds under the condition that I accept a one-time offer that you are obligated to make

So no, I wouldn't personally smash your car. I would reject your $10 offer in the game.

Fair enough, but the result is still the same in both cases.

Do you feel like you were obligated to some amount out of the game?
Terpie
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 175



View Profile
April 21, 2011, 05:42:02 PM
 #40

An interesting hypothetical to the spite-happy people.

My grandmother dies and leaves me $5000 inheritance.  You are my next-door neighbor.  You ask for some of the money.  I say "sure, I'm feeling nice here's $10".  Do you bash my $5000 car with a hammer because I didn't give you enough?

It's harder to think of a scenario that is less analogous to the game than this one. You're missing the point entirely.

How is it different?  Because in one case there is a "rightful" owner, and the first case, the money appears to be "shared" at one point in time?

Well, I can't respond for anyone else. I can only give you my opinion and subjective values. And besides, this is somewhat of a red herring to the fact that rejecting an offer in the game is not irrational under any circumstances.

Anyways, I personally would find that:

1. You have a legal claim to the entirety of the funds
2. You are not obligated to make any offer to me
3. You are not receiving the funds under the condition that I accept a one-time offer that you are obligated to make

So no, I wouldn't personally smash your car. I would reject your $10 offer in the game.

Fair enough, but the result is still the same in both cases.

Do you feel like you were obligated to some amount out of the game?

No, but I value cooperation/fairness enough that I'd prefer teaching a lesson over $10. But like someone else said, offer me 1% of a trillion and I'll quickly change my tune.
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!