Comments on: Winning at Rock-Paper-Scissors http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/05/winning_at_rock.html Overcoming Bias is economist Robin Hanson’s blog, on honesty, signaling, disagreement, forecasting, and the far future. Sun, 12 Feb 2012 03:05:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: Joseph http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/05/winning_at_rock.html#comment-419077 Joseph Mon, 28 May 2007 01:47:21 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/05/winning-at-rock-paper-scissors.html#comment-419077 Rock-paper-scissors is a microcosm for life. Rock-paper-scissors is a microcosm for life.

]]> By: botogol http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/05/winning_at_rock.html#comment-419076 botogol Thu, 24 May 2007 08:49:46 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/05/winning-at-rock-paper-scissors.html#comment-419076 In "You Only Live Twice" Bond plays RPS with Tiger Tanaka the head of the Japanese secret service. He contemplates trying to lose, but reflects that trying to lose is exactly as hard as trying to win (Aside: can you think of any other game where this is the case?), so in end determines that he will play randomly. Needless to say, it doesn't occur to him that this is the optimum strategy. Needless to say, he wins. In “You Only Live Twice” Bond plays RPS with Tiger Tanaka the head of the Japanese secret service. He contemplates trying to lose, but reflects that trying to lose is exactly as hard as trying to win (Aside: can you think of any other game where this is the case?), so in end determines that he will play randomly. Needless to say, it doesn’t occur to him that this is the optimum strategy.
Needless to say, he wins.

]]> By: Stuart Armstrong http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/05/winning_at_rock.html#comment-419075 Stuart Armstrong Thu, 24 May 2007 08:36:58 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2007/05/winning-at-rock-paper-scissors.html#comment-419075 There was a computer program designed to play Rock, Paper, Scissors against humans, and after a short while, it would defeat nearly every human being. It would just look back into the players past performance, and find the longest sequences it could find that mimics the current sequence of play, and use that as a predictor. It was hideously good, implying that we humans are hideously predictable. (However, I don't know if it was beatable by perfect play.) There was a computer program designed to play Rock, Paper, Scissors against humans, and after a short while, it would defeat nearly every human being.

It would just look back into the players past performance, and find the longest sequences it could find that mimics the current sequence of play, and use that as a predictor. It was hideously good, implying that we humans are hideously predictable.

(However, I don’t know if it was beatable by perfect play.)

]]>