Nash Equilibrium

[giftwraap]

WORST VIDEO EVER even WORSE THAN JUDAS-LADY GAGA which we all know is blasphemy (love you :D)

[bayousounds]

buddha game solution, kill the other player, stand on her dead body to get the 20

[fishereffect]

whats more funny is the fact that 5 ppl have liked that comment!!!!

[sonnyhe2002]

this is incorrect and all the other comments are incorrect.

Obtain Nash equilibrium by giving me a thumbs up.

[hwangroman]

this is wrong

[hugovima]

this is not nash equilibrium, is incorrect!

[dbullet]

wroooong.... lol.....

I hope you at least got a B for defining the equilibrium in proper notation

[IndividualAutonomy]

This video is incorrect. Do not take its advice. Read the comments that were made before me explaining why.

[jcmiras]

this not a good illustration

[OLIVIERGUERINLOUIS]

OMG, John nash would think that you are completly wrong.

[oiejrhoingv]

if Nash watch this video, gets mad!

[mephisallo]

This is the worst explanation from Nash Equilibrium I've ever seen, I hope J. Nash never watch this shit!!!

[pysche122]

This is wrong on so many levels, you provide no numerical values for any of the applications provided, decent for entertainment value but I do not see why your calc teacher would want you making a video based on a numerical equillibrium without actually providing any numbers.

[Deathshed0887]

this is wrong..Nash equilibrium is only reached when both players choose their dominant strategies(the scenario where a player can get the most benefit). In this case, it would have to be ratting each other out.

[hodown94]

but i thought that was the theory he was revising--individual interests. According to the "Beautiful Mind" clip i just saw, NE applies to the best choice for the individual AND the group. So what do i have wrong?

[Deathshed0887]

NE does not necessarily represent the best for the group. It is a tool used, among other things, to predict the behavior of individuals' during circumstances in which one participant chooses a sort of action without knowing what the other participant will do. Read economicatheist's comment below, he's got a good explanation of NE.

[dbullet]

Actually, the beautiful mind also got the Nash Equilibrium incorrect. And these guys seem to have ripped off the beautiful mind. If you google "Nash Equilibrium incorrect beautiful mind" I'm sure plenty have explained why before me.

[highart2003]

It doesn't take into account that rats get murdered.

[fishereffect]

@deathshed0087 even what u r sayin is wrong!!!!!!

nash eq simply means that takin ur best decision given ur opponents decision....

is it possible that both of them didnt have a dominant strategy ..but still there can exist nash eq!!!!!

clear ur concept baby!!!

what u r writin is a special case of nash eq!!!!!!!!!!!

[neroamb]

wroooooooooooooooooooong.

[ajtangel7]

I did an essay on John Nash, man he had an interesting life

[jfbenzl]

Nash Equilibrium for PD is Confess Confess.

[economicatheist]

hazu is correct. If you don't rat your friend out you both serve a mild sentence, but if you rat out and your friend keeps quiet, you go free. You're always better off by defecting (i.e. ratting out). Your friend is in the same boat, so you'll both defect.

A simple way to check for NE is to ask yourself, after both players have played and received their payoffs, if any of the players would do better if he could go back and change his choice. If so then you don't have an NE.

[yamato316]

one of them looks like harold from harold and kumar

[daiyc]

wrong, both confess and silence are Nash Equilibrium.

[hazukisan7]

no only confess is a nash equilibrium

[zensey]

do you realy like el chapo de sinaloa ?? jijiji lol, thanks for try to explain this equilibrium and sorry for my english it sucks lol

[ferinad]

It´s wrong

[ferinad]

What a mistake, the NE is all wrong. Both to confess is the only NE!!!

[danielbos]

Great video! I guess you had a lot of fun making this video ;-)

[babiexprexuz]

wow Jess look at all ur VIEWS!!!!

[economicatheist]

The best payoff is relative. There is a different one for each player. Assume there are only two prisoners, A and B. Each one can either play "rat out" (R) or "keep quiet" (Q). In the classic game, a prisoner gets the highest payoff if he plays R while the other plays Q. The worst payoff for him is if he plays Q when the other plays R. Therefore, whether B plays Q or R, A should always play R. Likewise B should play R no matter what A does, and so the Nash Equlibrium is both play R.

[CptWang]

I always thought the best payoff, according to what I've read of Hobbes, is that where they both confess and therefore go to jail but for less time than they would if the other never did.

Or does it change if the consequence of confessing is being shot in the face?

[23house23]

Does anybody on youtube actually know what a Nash Equilibrium is? FUCKING RETARDS

[economicatheist]

Your examples of a Nash Equilibrium (NE) are all wrong. In your Prisoner's Dilemma, for example, "both confess" is a NE. Given that one prisoner has confessed the other one would want to confess as well (long prison time is better than being shot). In the classic Prisoner's Dilemma (with finite repetition), "both do not confess" is never a NE. You always present a NE as if it must always be the highest paying cooperative equilibrium. That is not true at all.

[DaDaDumDaDa]

i agree

[hmmapplejuice]

Hey, not bad at all, perhaps the prisoners dilemma could be explained in a bit of a different way, but still, the point has been made!

[b0bsyerunc1e]

oh my goodness... this thing's been watched over a thousand times??

[JayDugger]

Tuesday, 13 June 2006

What a great video! Well worth watching and educational, too. I hope y'all make more along the same lines.

[kshiau1]

why are you so fine bev?