I don't think this point of view is at all defensible. The "game theory" I am referencing is the most basic thing, the very foundation of that discipline, and if you don't think it is applicable, I posit the following scenario:
Consider the Cold War-era state of affairs (because we seem to be heading back that way, at least a little bit), with the following variations:
A. Nuclear weapons do not exist.
B. USA has nuclear weapons. Russia does not.
C. Russia has nuclear weapons. USA does not.
D. Both USA and Russia have nuclear weapons.
Suppose you're an American. (WLOG, so adjust appropriately.) Now rank those four possible scenarios in order of your personal preference.
Personally, I'd rank C dead last. If you don't... why?
alt Hacker News
> spare the world from ... game theories
I don't think this point of view is at all defensible. The "game theory" I am referencing is the most basic thing, the very foundation of that discipline, and if you don't think it is applicable, I posit the following scenario:
Consider the Cold War-era state of affairs (because we seem to be heading back that way, at least a little bit), with the following variations:
A. Nuclear weapons do not exist.
B. USA has nuclear weapons. Russia does not.
C. Russia has nuclear weapons. USA does not.
D. Both USA and Russia have nuclear weapons.
Suppose you're an American. (WLOG, so adjust appropriately.) Now rank those four possible scenarios in order of your personal preference.
Personally, I'd rank C dead last. If you don't... why?