Conversation
Notices
-
Embed this notice
mist (ai@cawfee.club)'s status on Tuesday, 17-Oct-2023 14:38:35 JST 
mist
Fedimath Episode 2: How to Survive Fediblock
There are 100 instances located at points 1, 2, ..., 100 on the political spectrum (the real number line).
There are N users who move from instance to instance. There are no alt accounts: each user uses exactly one instance at each moment in time. Users may move from their current instance to any politically adjacent one. (This means that, starting at instance 5, they can move to 4 or 6.)
Eliza Fox wishes to destroy the fediverse, while Jeff Cliff wishes to protect it. There are 99 turns, each of which has three phases:
- First, Eliza chooses an instance to Fediblock, destroying it completely.
- Second, Jeff moves each user of the now-destroyed instance to any politically adjacent instance which has not been destroyed. (If no such instance exists, then those users are executed.)
- Third, Jeff may move all users however much he wants, as long as they do not enter a destroyed instance.
At the end of the 99 turns, 99 instances have been destroyed, so there is only 1 instance remaining.
(For convenience, let us say that users can be split into fractions without harming them in any way.)
Your task: Explain how Jeff can save the lives of N/50 users. Furthermore, explain how Eliza can prevent him from saving more than N/50 lives.
---
Example: Suppose there are 4 instances, with user counts (10, 10, 10, 10) respectively. Eliza and Jeff will take 3 turns.
During the first turn, Eliza destroys instance 2, and Jeff moves 4 of those users to the left and 6 of them to the right. The user count is now (14, _, 16, 10). Jeff moves 3 users from instance 3 to instance 4. The user count is now (14, _, 13, 13). Note that Jeff cannot move any users from instance 1 to instance 3 or 4, because they would have to cross through instance 2, which no longer exists.
During the second turn, Eliza destroys instance 1. Since those 14 users have nowhere to go, they are executed. The user count is now (_, _, 13, 13). Jeff moves 2 users from instance 4 to instance 3. The user count is now (_, _, 15, 11).
During the third turn, Eliza destroys instance 3, and Jeff is forced to move all 15 of those users to the right. The user count is now (_, _, _, 26). Jeff has saved 26 out of 40 lives.
---
Extra credit: Let us make the model more realistic by requiring that, during the second phase of each turn, all users of the now-destroyed instance *must* move to the right. (Again, if this is not possible, then those users are executed.) How many lives can Jeff save in that case? (I don't know the answer.)
---
See Fedimath Episode 1 here: https://cawfee.club/notice/AW5NEadIHCuYtgWRt2
cc @MercurialBlack @scenesbycolleen @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @roboneko @jeffcliff @hidden- MondoBizarrro and Pleroma-tan like this.
-
Embed this notice
:blobancap: :blobcattrans: :blobancap: :blobcattrans: :blobancap: :blobcattrans: (allison@hidamari.apartments)'s status on Tuesday, 17-Oct-2023 14:38:34 JST 
:blobancap: :blobcattrans: :blobancap: :blobcattrans: :blobancap: :blobcattrans:
@ai @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @roboneko @hidden @scenesbycolleen @MercurialBlack @jeffcliff I'm basically mathematically illiterate, but reading the description given here it really reminds me of a more adversarial variant of what I remember of the Josephus problem (of course, probably best not to look that up if you don't want to get spoiled) -
Embed this notice
mist (ai@cawfee.club)'s status on Tuesday, 17-Oct-2023 15:19:50 JST
mist
@hidden @MercurialBlack @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @jeffcliff @roboneko @scenesbycolleen
I just played through it. One of the best interactive math explanations I've seen, *despite* its quadruple-vaxxed tone. I actually learned something new because I *incorrectly* guessed that "always cheat" would win because they can exploit "always cooperate."
It slightly annoys me that they changed all the standard terminology. For example, "copycat" is usually called "tit for tat," and "copykitten" is "tit for two tats." I find the phrase "tit for tat" to be funnier too.
Here's a funny bit of lore about the prisoner's dilemma tournament which the book is based on. It was a real public tournament which anybody could enter their own bot into. Lots of professors submitted incredibly sophisticated strategies, and they were all BTFO by the humble "copycat" which was the winner.
There's a little-known way to gank prisoner's dilemma tournaments. What you do is submit one "main" bot and hundreds of "feeder" bots. Your bots start each round by executing a secret "handshake" move sequence; if they recognize each other as both being your bot, then the "feeder" will purposely let the "main" bot exploit it. If the opponent is not recognized as one of your own bots, then your bot will just play "copycat." As long as you can enter enough "feeder" bots into the tournament, your "main" bot will be guaranteed to win. The implication for cult behavior is clear.
Lastly, there's an error in one of the explanations (see pic). None of the games considered in this slideshow are "zero-sum." Zero sum would mean that the payoffs in every case are exactly opposite: if you get +X, then I get -X. Since the "cooperate" case gives positive payout to both players, this game is not zero sum. -
Embed this notice
?Hidden? (hidden@cawfee.club)'s status on Tuesday, 17-Oct-2023 15:19:51 JST 
?Hidden?
@ai @MercurialBlack @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @jeffcliff @roboneko @scenesbycolleen This is so cursed but I know you're gonna know about this reference, it reminds me of the game theory coin game "The Evolution of Trust" -
Embed this notice
mist (ai@cawfee.club)'s status on Wednesday, 18-Oct-2023 03:40:43 JST
mist
@allison @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @roboneko @hidden @scenesbycolleen @MercurialBlack @jeffcliff @udongle
I didn't make this connection until reading this post, but you're right! In fact, when I was making the problem, I initially wanted the instances to be joined in a ring, inspired by my vague understanding that some old computer networks were arranged that way.
I decided to put them on a line because it makes the analysis more uniform. (Starting from a ring, Eliza would destroy any instance and then it becomes a line anyways.) But CMD and udongle's simpler solution works just as well for a ring. All that is needed is that Eliza can totally disconnect the network after destroying 50 instances.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the