• Etterra@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      This is why you should read Ender’s Game before you’re allowed to watch YouTube.

      • sam@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        44
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I remember the vitriol of old reddit. I believe you are contributing to that more than helping.

        Reddit was never pure in terms of discussion or kindness; I think you’ve got some heavily tinted rose glasses on. But reddit succeeded and brought you the deep, insightful discussion you crave because the enthusiasts were there. And enthusiasts are human, they are not all heartless cogs there to infodump and complain. The most knowledgeable, well-read, and well-spoken people I know are also ones to crack jokes and make their passions accessible and interesting.

        If you want healthy discussion, I strongly believe you should allow at least a bit of levity and let people speak a little more freely. Chastising people for not being insightful enough will turn away plenty of the people you want to keep.

        Let neckbeards and normies mingle. It’s okay to have fun.

        Also worth mentioning: this is Microblog Memes. It’s in the name.

      • sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        4 months ago

        Enshittification is specifically a platform getting worse because it needs to shift resources to its advertisers or itself. If you think this is happening on Lemmy, I would you curious how, otherwise please do not contribute to diluting the term and making it into a synonym of “thing getting worse”

        • intensely_human@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Enshittification, per the rules of english, is when you turn something into shit.

          Don’t really care what Corey Doctorow wants to refer to, but he’s welcome to make up a word that doesn’t have a meaning already per the rules of the English language.

      • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Are you a robot in a SciFi film who just turned evil or is the massive quantity of red light coming out of your eyes just your rose tinted glasses

      • Jimbo@yiffit.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        How dare you talk to my boy Kolanaki like that

        Never talk to me or my dog again

        Jokes aside, 2 days in and a 50 downvote comment seems almost impressive

        Almost

  • MinusPi (she/they)@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’m indifferent to the content, but I fucking hate that they took the name Game Theory. I can’t talk about this genuinely fascinating topic just about anywhere without kids screaming about the channel.

        • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          26
          ·
          4 months ago

          It doesn’t study games, it studies competitive systems. Mathematicians chose to call competitive systems games and that was a mistake.

          • Ultraviolet@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            And what’s a concise word to describe a system in which participants make decisions within some ruleset where the interaction between each participant’s decisions and the ruleset leads to determining whether each participant wins or loses?

  • AWildMimicAppears@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    for the longest time, i did know that game theory did not have anything to do with “games” and that it is somehow connected to the prisoners dilemma, but the concept as such wasn’t very clear to me. If you are like my former me, take 30 minutes out of your day and visit https://ncase.me/trust/ to learn and play around with game theory; it’s a great webpage and it’s pretty good fun all around.

    • Katzastrophe@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      4 months ago

      We have game theory as an a elective at my uni, the amount of people who signed up for game theory instead of game design is staggering

      • tacosplease@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        4 months ago

        Those people would benefit from game theory then. Game theory is all about using the information available to make the best possible choice.

    • suction@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      4 months ago

      Why would I play game theory when I can play actual games?? It’s like reading about sex positions when your horny naked fwb is right next to you, I tells ya!

    • homura1650@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      If you want to learn about games you want combinatorial game theory. Traditional game theory isn’t completely divorced from real games either, but comes up more often in economics.

  • Sotuanduso@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    4 months ago

    I took Game Theory and the professor’s first name was Patrick. Some ID for something related to the course (that he chose himself) was “patmath”.

  • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    4 months ago

    Game theory final exam:

    Full Marks (100%):

    You will receive full marks if you answer all questions correctly and at least 70% of the class chooses the “Full Marks” strategy.

    If you answer all questions correctly but fewer than 70% of the class chooses the “Full Marks” strategy, your grade will be 90%

    Half Marks (50%):

    You will receive half marks if you answer all questions correctly but at least 30% of the class chooses the “Half Marks” strategy.

    If you choose this strategy and the class distribution aligns as specified, your grade will be 50% irrespective of the correctness of your answers.

    Fail (0%) with Incentive:

    You will receive a failing grade if you choose the “Fail” strategy or if your answers are incorrect and less than 30% of the class chooses the “Fail” strategy.

    If you choose the “Fail” strategy and at least 30% of the class also chooses the “Fail” strategy, you will receive a special incentive: Automatic ‘A’ grade in the next course module, regardless of your performance in this exam.

    Additionally, if more than 70% of the class chooses “Fail” or “Half Marks” strategies combined, everyone will fail regardless of individual choices.

    • wieson@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      I think you need an inverse incentive:

      If you are the only one to use “Fail” strategy, you finish with 100% and everybody’s result will be mutliplied by 0.8

      • Rusty@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        I’m also confused about the that. I searched for game theory on duckduckgo and google and the top results are about the math field. I’ve tried to search “game theory site:youtube.com” and I see videos from the channel “The Game Theorists”. Is that it?

        • sanpedropeddler
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 months ago

          Yes, I forgot that’s what their channel is actually called. They’re known for their catch phrase “but that’s just a theory, a game theory” which is what I remember most about them.

    • sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      There’s a YouTube channel called Game Theory that spun off a song called “Pokemon Masters are Broke” by the Gregory Brothers.

      The main guy, “Matpat” just retired after 10 or so years of YouTubing

  • variants@possumpat.io
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    4 months ago

    It is now an umbrella term for the science of rational decision making in humans, animals, and computers.

    Sounds too academic for me

  • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    when you drive past the university entrance’s brand new million dollar fountain to get to the shit-tier computers in the cramped as fuck computer lab, then you start wondering if it was always like this

  • Aceticon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Imagine the disappointment of a young Anarchist after joining a Chaos Theory class.

  • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    41
    ·
    4 months ago

    Considering they have a net worth of $45m and $40m, respectively, then yes maybe Academia should have classes and seminars about them. Throw in a MrBeast ($1bn) for good measure.

    • jerkface@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      4 months ago

      I wonder what you think the role of academia in modern society should be.

      • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        4 months ago

        It depends on what the students want to learn. There are people who want to be scientists, people who want to be teachers, there are also people who want to make money and run a business.

        Academia is a place where people can get an in-depth knowledge of the thing(s) they’re interested in learning to help prepare them to be successful in the outside world.

        It is a valid and money-making industry to be a profitable YouTuber. It takes planning, strategy, project management, financing, accounting, and various other people skills. Just because it’s YouTube, and just because you may not take it seriously, makes it no less of a viable and marketable skill that could be taught to other people.

        Now it’s your turn: what is your idea of the role of academia in modern society?

        • jerkface@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          4 months ago

          Advancing the state of human understanding. You’re talking about business school.

        • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 months ago

          Not the other guy but IMO it’s pretty simple. Academia is for the pursuit of knowledge, you learn and the you contribute. That may coincide with making money and running a business but it does not have to. If you want to make money and run a business that’s what vocational studies should be, you learn a trade for the purpose of “being successful in the outside world”. The issue with society today is that we’ve come to glorify higher education and view vocations as some kind of negative. Academia in a modern society should stay focused on the pursuit of knowledge not on the pursuit of churning out degrees to make certain jobs look more legitimate than other jobs. Pursuit of money and running a business should be territory of vocational schools.

          There is no pursuit of knowledge in becoming a Youtuber or a Twitch streamer, so it should be taught as a vocation and not as a part of academia.

    • Tar_Alcaran
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      4 months ago

      Considering they have a net worth of $45m and $40m, respectively, then yes maybe Academia should have classes and seminars about them.

      According to Credit Suisse, there were 264,200 people with net worth above US$50 million at the end of 2021. That is completely not noteworthy of a mention in any way, on a global level.

      • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        4 months ago

        I beg to differ. There are over 8,123,000,000 people in the world. Your number (from three years ago) is only 0.003% of the world’s population. That’s less than 1%.

        Now, ignoring your fallacy of an argument, just because there are people in other careers that make more money does not mean being successful YouTuber/vLogger is any less viable than any other occupation.

        If that were the case, then there are a lot of more traditional roles that we wouldn’t be teaching; like Marine Biologist, who in the US makes on average $57k/year. And yet, Academia still pushes this science (among others) because there is still a demand for it.

        And make no mistake, Academia is not going to push subjects that aren’t in demand. They will teach what they feel is in demand enough to attract students.

      • rImITywR@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        Matt Patt was consulted when evaluating possible outcomes of the Cuban Missile Crisis.

        • adam_y@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          4 months ago

          Oh come on mate, I left an open goal for you there.

          You could have scored an easy one by saying that their understanding of economic factors in the new media landscape is a relatively new field for study.

          You could have talked about the aspects of social discourse and relationships between the maker and the viewer.

          Fuck, you could have even framed what they do as artistic expression

          But nope, you are too tied up in the misplaced metric of financial success.

          And here’s why lectures about that would be next to useless… Their experiences are not transferable. You can’t copy what they do and expect success. That’s because novelty is a factor and you cannot teach that.

          Compare that to the scientific method where everything relies on being exactly able to reproduce results.

          Sure, there are plenty of purposes for academia, but what you suggest really isn’t one of them.

        • jerkface@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          It’s not. It’s the actual point of academia. It is the one thing you cannot remove and still have academia.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      How’s their success mean that there’s another university course made after them.