Comment by mdp2021
4 hours ago
Not relevant to the point - "I gave my item to my former friend Paul". For some reason or for some other, it happens.
And miscalculations in game theory happen ("he wouldn't, given...").
4 hours ago
Not relevant to the point - "I gave my item to my former friend Paul". For some reason or for some other, it happens.
And miscalculations in game theory happen ("he wouldn't, given...").
I put my gold in the safe of my best friend, he has a good safe. Then I rapped and killed his wife and children, and destroyed his house. But he doesn’t want to give me the gold back.
You are doing the complexity of history, and the due diligence of objective assessment and focus, a great disservice with those gross similes.
Let us stick to a fitting analysis for the point of the limited trust entities can give each other, and let us stick to actual events for what the crimes committed are concerned (for the respect due).
ok, but russia and the west were never best friends, just some russians have major crushes on western europe and would still trust the europeans to hold their gold more than their own russian compatriots :))
Miscalculation is the right word.
And: it is relevant. You gave away the relevancy yourself. It is called game theory. Games have rules. Break rules see what happens. Or instead be prepared.
Seems like someone broke rules but wasn't thinking through consequences or didn't care about them
Ok, so you meant, with «I really wonder why - something must have happened», that what happened is that they did not calculate it through properly. But that is suggested for a large number of the players in that game. All losers, or going trough a very suboptimal path.
It would be realistic if administrations went through a path in decision making guided by the awareness of their own weakness in decision making abilities.