[MUD-Dev] More on Small Worlds

[Ted L. Chen]

Raph Koster relayed:

> Each group comprised individuals who adopted one of three
> behavioural strategies. "Co-operators" helped the group to improve
> its fitness at the expense of their individual
> rewards. "Defectors" willingly accepted the help of others, but
> did not reciprocate. "Punishers" behaved like co-operators, but
> also punished defectors at a cost to themselves.

> There is a long way to go, of course, before computational
> anthropologists can accurately simulate human societies. Dr Boyd
> hopes to move a bit in that direction by making the models of both
> individual behaviour and group structure more complex. For
> example, the existing model has no geography.  All the different
> groups are thus equally likely to encounter each other.  However,
> the model can already say something interesting about what might
> have happened hundreds of thousands of years ago. And that is no
> small feat.

Definately interesting.  However, I wonder what the factor of
mobility of the 'defectors' does on a system with geography
(physical and societal).  Modern con-artists rely on this mobility
to enter a new community.  Compariatively, the early con-artist
would just starve to death once exiled from the tribe.

As the paper suggests, let's assume that a community ranges in size
of 150-180 (rounded to 200).  On a MOG aiming for the say a
half-million subscriber mark, that's roughly 2500 possible
communities for a 'defector' to move to with relative ease.  Does
the communication between the 'punishers' of these communities
outpace the ability of these 'defectors' to move?  What affect on
the effectiveness of 'punishers' does this enhanced mobility have?


TLC


_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev