Comment by jappgar
10 hours ago
It would be useful to predict things like earthquakes and tornados. Gambling on what politicians and celebrities will do is not science it's degenerate court gossip.
10 hours ago
It would be useful to predict things like earthquakes and tornados. Gambling on what politicians and celebrities will do is not science it's degenerate court gossip.
Game theory can be applied to these problem, and if you can correctly model reward, cost and motives, you can predict decisions of politicians more often than not.
Even granting the idea that game theory can be applied successfully here; that does not really help with one-off events. Consider, knowing the odds of a coin flip does not grant you any real help in knowing what the next coin flip will be.
This is also ignoring that game theory of partisan games breaks if any of the participants knows what the other will do. Is one of the more famous ideas.
To that end, if you want to predict what someone will do, more often than not you are best looking at their experience doing said thing.
I don't think Nash envisioned politicians and their aides being able to profit from making decisions. Do you launch an attack on Eastasia? Well the market right now says there's a 40% chance, so I guess it's a good idea to grab your crypto keys and make some bets before you call the Joint Chiefs.
> you can predict decisions of politicians more often than not
What makes you believe this? The performance of economist/sociology experts using game theory to make predictions has been worse than a coin-flip up to this point. It also has done enormous damage.