The prisoner's dilemma is the story of two criminals who have been arrested for a heinous crime and are being interrogated separately. Each knows that if neither of them talks, the case against them is weak and they will be convicted and punished for lesser charges. If this happens, each will get only 5 years in prison. If both 'rat' on the other person, its a slam dunk case for the prosecution and they face life sentences. If only one person 'rats' and testifies against the other, the one who did not cooperate will get the death sentence while the other will get parole and go free.
What would you do? Why?
What does this have to do with Nuclear Deterrence policy?
How is this famous variation different from our class example? What was the surprising outcome?
No comments:
Post a Comment