TV and a fridge eh? a TV can be obtained for peanuts s/h and a fridge has to be provided by a landlord, so to say that everyone is better off is a load of balls.

Food poverty anyone? food parcels are on the rise in the UK because lots of people can’t afford to heat the house and feed themselves

the prisoner’s dilemma is the textbook non-zero-sum game, so we’ll here explore it by way of showing how, with the help of game theory, evolution can be simulated on a computer.

In the prisoner’s dilemma, two partners in crime are being interrogated separately. The state lacks the evidence to convict them of the crime they committed but does have enough evidence to convict both on a lesser charge bringing, say, a one-year prison term for each. The prosecutor wants conviction on the more serious charge, and pressures each man individually to confess and implicate the other. She says: “If you confess but your partner doesn’t, I’ll let you off free and use your testimony to lock him up for ten years. And if you don’t confess, yet your partner does, you go to prison for ten years. If you confess and your partner does too, I’ll put you both away, but only for three years.” The question is: Will the two prisoners cooperate with each other, both refusing to confess? Or will one or both of them “defect” (“cheat”)?

win win = 1 year each
win loose less win = free and 10 years.
So free is winning and 10 years in prison is winning less well than the free person. I think it is you who does not understand nor do you understand that when you dont win you loose even in non zero sum.

Prisoner’s dilemma doens’t give you only 2 options, but 3.

win/lose
lose/win
win/win. (or if you prefer, win less/win less)

1 year is a win because it’s less than 10
0 years is a bigger win because it’s less than 10 and 1
10 years is a loss.

Win/win in this scenario means that both parties win less but neither party loses.

The problem is that greedy people look at anything less than the best possible option as losing. Whereas other people look at all the good options as winning, and only consider themselves as losers when they actually lose.

Prisoner’s dilemma doesn’t entirely help that because the outcomes are so negative- it’s hard to think of a year in prison as a win. There are other alternatives that work better- yield/don’t yield in traffic is a good one.

Obviously you have three outcomes but win/loose or loose /win was irrelevant for the point I made ie you still get winners and loosers.
it is a given that in the real world wealth is not evenly shared so we can discount the win less well/win less well scenario from the real world as clearly some do loose. We have winners and loosers. I am labouring a self evident point here.

Junkyard – Member

it is a given that in the real world wealth is not evenly shared so we can discount the win less well/win less well scenario from the real world as clearly some do loose. We have winners and loosers. I am labouring a self evident point here.

Wealth doesn’t have to be equally divided to have a win/win situation. Just declaring things to be self evident doesn’t make them so.

What is it they are actually trying to stop you from saying. I’ve heard so many whiney right wingers complaining about those lefty pcers lately yet they never actually define what they are being stopped from doing or saying. What actually is it?

Countless examples of free speech being suppressed by left wing (and right wing admittedly) organisations. One recent example are the books of Mark Twain. Classic pieces of literature, but not as far as some left wingers are concerned, who want them banned, or rewritten, for being “offensive”.

And I’ve seen many examples in the media of left wing commentators saying “such and such an opinion will not be tolerated”. Usually from the very folk preaching so-called tolerance themselves.

Divide and rule..

Elements of this technique involve:

creating or encouraging divisions among the subjects in order to prevent alliances that could challenge the sovereign

aiding and promoting those who are willing to cooperate with the sovereign

fostering distrust and enmity between local rulers

encouraging meaningless expenditures that reduce the capability for political and military spending

well done you lefties and righties.. you are falling for the oldest trick in the book..
thanks a bunch

Left or Right to a lesser or greater extent they/you are all bonkers. Wish the actual and wannabe politicians could have another planet to play on.

Could they not have gone to that planet instead of the hairdressers and estate agents? (hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy).

Just declaring things to be self evident doesn’t make them so.

I have done slightly more than that on this thread and you cannot have, nor does capitalism provide. in the real world winners without loosers.
The richest three winners have more wealth that the poorest 48 countries. Apparently this is not winning and loosing but winning and winning less well. The word for winning less well is loosing and this is what occurs under capitalism hence why i said it was self evident.

kennyp
Countless examples of free speech being suppressed by left wing (and right wing admittedly) organisations. One recent example are the books of Mark Twain. Classic pieces of literature, but not as far as some left wingers are concerned, who want them banned, or rewritten, for being “offensive”.

Lets seeone actual example then Kennyp – not rumour mongering from the right wing press but an actual example.

One edition for use in schools of Tom Sawyer had the “N” word removed from it so as to make it easier to discuss other themes from it in American schools. Hardly what yo claim above.

so – lets see some real examples please

ive been thinking about this…..

right wing = politics of fear

left wing = politics of love

taken to extremes both can result in bad things but on the whole fear provokes nastier responses than love

well thats what i reckon anyway

Countless examples of free speech being suppressed by left wing

Ok then examples pliz thnx.

And I’ve seen many examples in the media of left wing commentators saying “such and such an opinion will not be tolerated”.

Ok then examples pliz thnx.

ive been thinking about this…..

right wing = politics of fear

left wing = politics of love

right wing = policy of self betterment and personal responsibility
left wing = policy of envy and blame

Lets seeone actual example then Kennyp – not rumour mongering from the right wing press but an actual example.

TJ, I spent ages on a previous thread asking you to produce evidence to back up an assertion, but none was forthcoming. 🙂

pliz thnx

What language is that?

right wing = policy of self betterment and personal responsibility
left wing = policy of envy and blame

LOL

What language is that?

Elfinese. One day you may learn it, and your life will be enhanced. 🙂

In the mean time, would you mind providing some examples of that which you claim pliz thnx.

Examples, both serious and silly.

The American Scrabble Association wanting certain words banned in Scrabble tournaments.

People on this forum being labelled “bigots” for expressing opinions contrary to the accepted PC norm.

Left-wing politicians in Scotland who admitted (gleefully) recently that singing the national anthem could in certain circumstances be deemed a hate crime.

Legislation that means beating up a person in silence may result in a lighter sentence than beating up someone while calling them names.

The director of a large Scottish financial firm forced to resign after using the phrase “**** in the woodpile”.

How many left-wing councils allow Enid Blyton books in their libraries.

Chris Brand fired from his post at Edinburgh University for expressing opinions that were deemed unacceptable.

The American Scrabble Association wanting certain words banned in Scrabble tournaments.

What words?

People on this forum being labelled “bigots” for expressing opinions contrary to the accepted PC norm.

Don’t you mean, some people on this forum being labelled ‘bigots’ because they are actually bigots?

Left-wing politicians in Scotland who admitted (gleefully) recently that singing the national anthem could in certain circumstances be deemed a hate crime.

What, you mean this bit?

Lord, grant that Marshal Wade,
May by thy mighty aid,
Victory bring.
May he sedition hush and like a torrent rush,
Rebellious Scots to crush,
God save the King.

Scottish people are all part of the United Kingdom now. So that lyric is somewhat out of date, and yes, I spose it does have hateful intent. Why do you have a problem with it being removed?

Legislation that means beating up a person in silence may result in a lighter sentence than beating up someone while calling them names.

Sigh. If you’re talking about ‘racially aggravated’ crimes, I suggest you go and read up about what they actually are…

The director of a large Scottish financial firm forced to resign after using the phrase “**** in the woodpile”.

Bloddy right an’ all. Shoon’t be so blinkered and ignorant to think such phrases, full of negative intonations and implications, are acceptable.

How many left-wing councils allow Enid Blyton books in their libraries.

Enid Blyton was a blinkered old dinosaur who certainly implied that women were inferior to men. As for the racist bit; well, she was a blinkered old dinosaur, what can I say? 😆 Weren’t the Gollywog ( a caricatured representation of Back people) always naughty and untrustworthy?

Once the three bold golliwogs, Golly, Woggie, and ****, decided to go for a walk to Bumble-Bee Common. Golly wasn’t quite ready so Woggie and **** said they would start off without him, and Golly would catch them up as soon as he could. So off went Woogie and ****, arm-in-arm, singing merrily their favourite song — which, as you may guess, was Ten Little **** Boys.

Chris Brand fired from his post at Edinburgh University for expressing opinions that were deemed unacceptable.

What, like advocating peadophillia? 😯

This is fun. Got any more?

Wunundred!

What I find interesting about this thread is that people have strongly formed opinions, and no matter how well a point is argued, their opinion will not change. What causes this?

Education – in this country dominated by left wingers for many years, not sure about in the US, but my guess is that it’s not.

Media – in the UK we actually have a pretty balanced system, BBC left wing, News Corp right wing, in the US more dominated by the right?

Parents and peers – you tend to follow your parents views, or the views of those you hang out with, this is likely to reinforce the influence of the above two influencers, but at the same time it is the most likely source of contrary opinion, yet we easily dismiss the opinions of our peers, prefering to listen to the opinions of our chosen media instead.

We are therefore, in this brave new world, not really capable of independant thought.

The BBC isn’t left wing.

I guess that depends on your viewpoint

In Scotland, the BBC are generally biased towards the parties on the Right of this picture…

Chris Brand fired from his post at Edinburgh University for expressing opinions that were deemed unacceptable.

Also in 1996 Brand came to the defense of Nobel laureate Daniel Carleton Gajdusek who had been charged with paedophilia. Brand wrote that, “Academic studies and my own experience [as a choir boy occasionally importuned by older men] suggest that non-violent paedophilia with a consenting partner over age 12 does no harm so long as the paedophiles and their partners are of above-average IQ and educational level.”
I cant really be arsed with the rest of your claims tbh but if you want to defend him feel free

Education – in this country dominated by left wingers for many years

I’ve often wondered this, seems that the vast majority of teachers are a bit left-leaning, certainly. Hmm, highly intelligent and educated people being Left-Wing, that’s interesting.

And mass-education is a bit of a socialist idea, no? ‘From those according to their ability to those according to their need’ sort of thing…

Left = Intelligent, objective, open minded.
Right = Blinkered, subjective and narrow-minded.

Yes, that about sums it up I think. 🙂

gearfreak – Member

I guess that depends on your viewpoint

Well its the right wing media push a clear agenda, low taxation, high criminal penalties, breaks for big business, privatisation of government assets etc etc etc.

The BBC as far as I can see does not push an agenda, maybe you could give some examples of its left wing bias? (

If you google bias on the BBC, the whole page is dominated by sources who have the opinion that the BBC has a left wing bias, there is not a single source (apart from the BBC itself) which takes the opposite opinion. Now as you feel that the BBC isn’t biased, you will look at the sources and complain that they are all right wing, and therefore that of course they think the BBC is biased, which does bring me back to my original point.

Hearsay and speculation that the BBC is left wing is just grasping at straws, actually show me the programs that push a left wing agenda.

I’ve often wondered this, seems that the vast majority of teachers are a bit left-leaning, certainly. Hmm, highly intelligent and educated people being Left-Wing, that’s interesting

There are also many highly intelligent and educated people who are neither teachers, nor left wingers. I would say it is much more likely that the profession attracts those with a left wing bias, which is then reinforced in the teacher training colleges, and through teaching media, see my previous post.

QED, despite me providing evidence that the BBC is biased, you dismiss it as it doesn’t fit with your world view, my point above is once again reinforced, we are no longer capable of independant thought, we are merely children of our upbringing/education/media.

You didn’t provide evidence, to claim you did is just an outright lie.

the vast majority of teachers are a bit left-leaning, certainly. Hmm, highly intelligent

Highly intelligent teachers? 😆

im still waiting for kennyp to explain why he agrees with that paedo guy

I would say it is much more likely that the profession attracts those with a left wing bias

I’d argue that it’s more likely that people get into what is essentially a caring and nurturing profession, and learn that left-wing ideologies are, in this instance, more suitable for development and progression.

Man right-wingers seem to think that education should be exclusive, elitist and divisive.

Most teachers work for the State. Y’know, that big Lefty Conspiracy construction…

The director of a large Scottish financial firm forced to resign after using the phrase “**** in the woodpile”.

im quite left wing, if it was up to be me would have been dragged out in the street and hung..

Kimbers, I’ll try to do this for him.

Our society has decided through years of discussion and legislation that sex between an adult and a minor is wrong. This is different from what was seen as acceptable 400 years ago, when a sexual partnership between an adult and a 14 or 15 year old girl would have seemed perfectly normal.

For someone to argue that our society has taken a wrong turning on this, and that actually an individual is capable of making their own decision about what sexual activities to persue, with whoever they choose at say the age of 13 should not be reason for their dismissal(from a post which does not involve direct and regular contact with minors). If that person were to abitraily decide that the law and society was wrong and was to actively persue sexual relationships with a minor would of course be wrong, but to make the argument is not. It is through open debate that society changes, and mainly for the better, other wise those rebels who ignored societal norms and argued for equal rights for women, and equal rights for slaves would have been dismissed and ignored.

(I would add that I would strongly argue against someone with this opinion about sex with minors, I do not agree with him, only with his right to make the argument)

despite me providing evidence that the BBC is biased

Statements along the lines of “it says so on the internet so it must be true” do not consititute evidence.

QED, despite me providing evidence that the BBC is biased, you dismiss it as it doesn’t fit with your world view, my point above is once again reinforced, we are no longer capable of independant thought

so they doint agree with you and this proves they are not independent…am I to assume that agreeeing with you would prove how independant my thoughts are?

One recent example are the books of Mark Twain. Classic pieces of literature, but not as far as some left wingers are concerned, who want them banned, or rewritten, for being “offensive”.

And that ^^ is classic piece of right-wing nonsense.

Two of Mark Twain’s books have indeed been “banned” at various times, starting in 1885. But this occurred in the “freedom loving” United States, and the bans could not be described some sort of left-wing plot. In fact the bans often have had much more to do with conservative attitudes. For example Huckleberry Finn was banned because it was considered inappropriate for studying and reading in public libraries, being “rough, coarse and inelegant” and “more suited to the slums that to intelligent, respectable people”.

It’s political correctness gone mad I tellya !!!!