ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 22 พ.ค. 2024
- Puzzle through the classic game theory challenge, The Prisoner’s Dilemma, and decide: would you choose to spare or sacrifice?
--
Two perfectly rational gingerbread men, Crispy and Chewy, are out strolling when they’re caught by a fox. Instead of simply eating them, he decides to put their friendship to the test with a cruel dilemma. He’ll ask each gingerbread man whether he’d opt to Spare or Sacrifice the other. What should they choose? Lucas Husted dives into the classic game theory scenario: the Prisoner's Dilemma.
Lesson by Lucas Husted, directed by Ivana Bošnjack and Thomas Johnson.
Sign up for our newsletter: bit.ly/TEDEdNewsletter
Support us on Patreon: bit.ly/TEDEdPatreon
Follow us on Facebook: bit.ly/TEDEdFacebook
Find us on Twitter: bit.ly/TEDEdTwitter
Peep us on Instagram: bit.ly/TEDEdInstagram
View full lesson: ed.ted.com/lessons/how-to-out...
Thank you so much to our patrons for your support! Without you this video would not be possible! John Hong, Minh Tran, Helen Lee, Anthony Benedict, Turine Tran, Mathew Samuel, Karthik Balsubramanian, Lee, Livia-Alexandra Sarban, Annastasshia Ames, João Henrique Rodrigues, Sebastiaan Hols, Aries SW, SANG HAN, Amy Lopez, ReuniteKorea, Vinh-Thuy Nguyen, Liz Candee, Clovis Norroy, Danielle Downs, Nik Maier, Angel Pantoja, Nishant Suneja, 张晓雨, Srinivasa C Pasumarthi, Kathryn Vacha, Anthony Arcis, Jeffrey Segrest, Sandra Fuller Bocko, Alex Pierce, Lawrence Teh Swee Kiang, BRENDAN NEALE, Jane White, Karmi Nguyen, John C. Vesey, Yelena Baykova, Harshita Jagdish Sahijwani, Won Jang, Nick Johnson, Tariq Keblaoui, Carlos H. Costa, Eimann P. Evarola, Aleksandr Lyozin, Mohamed Elsayed, Alan Wilder, Marcus Appelbaum, Francisco Leos, Kevin O'Leary, Les Howard and Ten Cha.
![[UNCUT] ฝันรักห้วงนิทรา | EP.3 (1/4)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zVXAFD1OLZg/mqdefault.jpg)
Why isn’t that wizard minding his own business? Typical wizard.
131 likes, a heart from the channel and no replies? I have come to change such an abomination
My hero
@@mrsahilbawa not all of us wear capes
@@jmstudios3049 I can get behind this!!!
You have no power here, Gandalf Stormcrow.
"Two perfectly rational gingerbread men"
_As gingerbread men usually are_
Yeah they are rational.... I mean they aren't pie 🥧 right? 😂 😂
These ones weren’t.
Gingerbread men usually run instead of being eaten.
@@meghanav3450 noice
Cool
*w h a t*
"Infinite triple limb consumption" is not a phrase I had expected to ever hear in my life, but I am not disappointed
Sounds like a great name for my future deathcore band
some like some skill youd hear in an MMO rpg
It's actually a cocktail.
Made with triple sec and armagnac, served in a Klein bottle.
Please, have you learned NOTHING during the recent Pandemie?! Incurable tuberculosis in three limbs is no fun… Just saying 🤓.
@@mareikedregger1513
Damn, my arm has been having lung problems recently... I think it's too late for me
if the gingerbread men were actually smart they would have just offered to let the fox eat their gingerbread house
I….um…yea…any ambitions to become sec of state? Very nice.
It's not about hunger. Fox is malevolent creature here
Well do they have Ginger Brains?
If they were perfectly logical and could discuss their choices before, then they would spare each other
@JackOfAllTrades except that would mean they'd be melting the next time it rained...
“The weather today is partly suspicious, with chances of betrayal.”
*wow who hurt you*
It's simple.
"Society"
I feel like everyone will be hurt lie that once in their life at least...
Everything
EXISTENCE IS PAIN, no more lies
when the dark clouds seem to be moving away and clear skies approaching, but it rains anyway. Nature will always choose to rain when you don't have ur umbrella.
Plot Twist :
The Fox Was Disguised As The Wizard, To Eat them Everyday!
The fox eventually got diabetes and died
Clever fox 👌🏼
the wizard was the fox
The wizard was an animagus
It should be the wizard was disguised as the fox as the fox cant do magic😐 not the other way around
"Their eternity may be very *crumby* but so long as they go out on a *limb* their lives will never be *half baked."* well done guys. Got three puns in at the final few seconds of the video. Bravo
trust in the word of God, Matthew 7:24-27 Jesus says here, Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: and the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: and the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it. Jesus saves, God bless.😊😊😊
lol😂
I like stuff like this because its a convincing argument you can make to even a sociopath that morality is a logical thing.
I highly doubt that
^true, cuz instead of labeling it as "morality" in their pov, they'll be more inclined towards "cynicism" n smth like that... that is rationally n fundamentally advantageous. also, if it's a sociopath, u won't really need tht much of an effort to tell them about this argument where you'll hve to technically "convince" them cuz once they hear it, they'll learn n know how it can benefit them, they're smart afterall....so yeah. so if/when they agree, it could be seen as morally correct n all but really tho...in this case, i think "morality"(if any) here would just be a by-product.
just my opinion. everyone is free to agree to disagree
Regard for morality is often the setback to logical outcomes
@@sren7383 not in this scenario at least. if they both chose the morally best option of sparing each other, they both don't have much to lose and it's still better than the other options where either or both are hurt more.
I agree that most people's morals are actually calculated self interest
alternate ending:
the fox dies because he ate too much sugar.
No it only eats a few limbs he probably won’t die
@@xiaoweishi5873 yeah he eats a few limbs... infinitely
Damn son you got the whole squad laughing
@@jewelsb4926 there's a wizard involved, don't bring logic into this
There is a chance that his stomach and hunger resets.
“Seeing how happy they are, he decides that instead of simply eating them...”
Aww. How kind of him -
“... he will subject them to a game of mental anguish as well as physical torture.”
What the - ?
IKR LMAO XDDDDDD
lmao
Mr. Wolf is a straight up sociopath 😂
The usual fairy tales and fables 😂
Clearly a German fairy tale.
At that point I'd just say "well, if he's going to eat one or part of us anyway. New plan: Kill the fox or die trying."
I'd say YOLO, but it wouldn't apply here.
YOLF(you only live forever)!
no, no i totally get it. screw logic
so in terms of the prisoner's dilemma, shoot the cops?
Ok but I mean unless you're that one massive gingerbread man from Shrek 2, it'll probably just end in both of you dying
@@afaultytoaster I think that is fair, when the cops threaten to eat your limbs
The flaw in the rationality is that while crispy looses nothing of his own, he does lose something very valuable: a friend
*loses
Hope everyone is doing good
Moral of the story: Don’t look happy when you encounter a fox.
If they weren't looking happy, he would've just eaten them both.
K Hays and they wouldn't have to go through all this decision-making and eternal punishment :)
Natalí Cox meh! I have a family of foxes 🦊 visit me every evening. I’m always happy to see them.
julie Wallis wait for real? That’s so cutee
They should’ve squeaked like a dolphin. It’s a wise tip I’ve heard from a Brazilian man 😌😂
Of course the gingerbread people are perfectly rational, everyone in the Ted Ed universe is
If only humans could be perfectly rational.
They're all mathematicians!
Lol this is the first time I got hearted, pretty cool
@@crullestcow5395 In this case perfect rationality led to a double betrayal and the loss of 3 limbs each, as well as being cursed to repeat the dilemma for eternity. If they had both chosen to just cooperate from the start they'd have walked away with the same end result, but without being eaten partially every day
@@freakymoejoe2 but wouldn't true perfect rationality have involved them realizing that if they spared the other from the go, the other would likely have done the same? It's not even completely altruistic or unreasonable to think.
I mean if anything it's irrational & cynical (not saying you are) to think that these two friends would abandon their friendship in a situation like this without them having the wherewithal to think "if I continue to walk in my friendship, then maybe my friend will do the same".
Fox: So have you decided?
Fox: Who will be sacrificed and who will be spared?
Chewy & Crispy: (in unison) Yes we have decided to sacrifice the WIZARD!!!
Wizard: OH NO!
Wizard: Wait, that's illegal
Fox: Wait, what wizard?
Chewey: The one that put us in this time loop.
Fox: Hmm, maybe I can get magic powers if I eat the wizard.
I attack the moon (if you get it You get it)
@@foxgaming7781 I get it and it hurts
“ Fox, we have come to bargain ...”
“ You have come to have your limbs eaten “
the cookies: 😀😀
the fox: yall a lil too happy so imma test y’all
the cookies: 😐😐
school in a nutshell
@@potatoslayer5963 nah
Wizard: *Sees the fox tormenting gingerbread men*
Wizard: What a fine young lad.
Wizard: *Sees Gingerbread men acting logically*
Wizard: HOLD UP
XD LOL
@@GeoBlits As a fellow fox, I agree with the wizard for feeding our kind with gingerbread men.
@@lucielm Poor gingerbread men.
I mean if the scenario is truely infnite then the fox is trapped in the same time loop.
Unless we assume it's a different fox every day for all of eternity.
@@metazoxan2
A time loop of filling his belly every day with tasty gingerbread.
Oh, so THAT'S how you outsmart the Prisoners' Dilemma... by just changing the premise so it's literally not the Prisoners' Dilemma anymore.
it just shows you that the logic for solving it applies to any situation with cooperation/betrayal choices
Agreed. The very point of the prisoners dilemma is that the 2 contestants don’t know the outcome. Having some magical wizard doom them to doing this forever just means they are pretty much forced to spare each other unless they want to be limbless for eternity.
There are multiple solutions to the prisoners dilemma, all requiring some form of enforcement mechanism. In this case it's future outcomes that enforce today's outcome.
@@here_be_dragons9184 It's not really beating, it's changing the conditions.
Yup because i’m faced with a perfect prisoner’s dilemma everyday
This video is a great way to show explain all of these concepts. My only qualm is that I don't think Chewy and Crispy friendship is represented by the problem which is fine for the video but it would of been fun to talk about. If my friend was going to lose 3 or all of his limbs I would probably value those at least a little bit. The simple graph assumes that Chewy and Crispy are opposing players in a game and not working against the fox on a team with limited communication. I would have to assume that two real friends would draw the graph out based on the total number of limbs between the two of them rather than the number of limbs individually and therefore always pick Spare from the get go.
Well, a prisoner's dilemma is usually just that: 2 captured prisoners. The prisoners might be former friends or allies. Or they might be 2 total strangers who just happened to be caught together. If it's 2 friends or family members, you might choose spare, spare - simply because of the guilt and remorse that might be associated with betraying a friend or family member.
Gingerbread people are sociopaths. This is common knowledge.
I’d also like to point out that the option to discuss (given in the video) is another game changer. In the traditional Prisoner’s Dilemma (at least as I’ve heard it), the prisoners are not given a chance to discuss before choosing whether or not to sell out the other. Therefore, it is more profitable to sell out the other. In addition, traditionally, it’s measured in years in prison.
However, in this situation, they can discuss with the other, and the stakes are higher than years in prison. I would argue that this could result in a different outcome.
See, here we know that the stakes are losing one limb, losing three limbs, losing no limbs, and being eaten completely. However, being left with 3 limbs is arguably more than 3x better than being left with 1 limb. Being left with 1 limb leaves you basically useless, but being left with 3 limbs you can recover from. Also, being rational, Crispy and Chewy would know that if no alternate deal is reached, both would choose to sacrifice the other and they would be left in pain and basically useless with only one limb each. As such, it is in both of their best interests to end with 3 limbs instead of 1, assuming they can trust each other enough to know the other one will do as they have agreed. If they did not discuss this, they would both sacrifice the other, however, being able to discuss it ahead of time, they could agree to both spare the other. This leaves them at risk of the other betraying them, but it also optimizes their chances of surviving afterwards. Remember that they’d be left with one limb each for the rest of their lives, and it’s quite possible those lives would be miserable and *very* short as two gingerbread men left vulnerable with only 1 limb.
God, the animation is phenomenal, shout out to the animators : Ivana bosnjak and Thomas Johnson
Especially in this episode. That cotton animation was so good
Sorry that is Ivana Bošnjak and if i am not wrong she is from Bosnia
Amazing animation
And here I am watching in 144p because I'm poor
i thought this was stop motion
not animation
When you realise that the wizard is just trying to feed his pet fox. Being a freelance wizard is a low income job after all.
You'd imagine that being a freelance wizard would earn you the big buckeroonies, but between taxes and the lack of advertising it unfortunately doesn't tend to work out
I am wondering was Howard did not sure down during covid
Even a state funded wizard pays pretty low. New Zealand's official wizard only made 11k a year before he was let go.
Mutually Assured Destruction also breaks the rules by changing the variables from how many limbs remain to "survive" or "die," with any scenario where you die being absolutely undesirable, and thus guaranteeing neither side will betray the other.
Agreed. It’s important to note that there are two critical differences between the traditional prisoner’s dilemma and this one.
Here, the option to discuss (given in the video) is game changer. In the traditional Prisoner’s Dilemma (at least as I’ve heard it), the prisoners are not given a chance to discuss before choosing whether or not to sell out the other. Therefore, it is more profitable to sell out the other. In addition, traditionally, it’s measured in years in prison.
However, in this situation, they can discuss with the other, and the stakes are higher than years in prison. I would argue that this could result in a different outcome.
See, here we know that the stakes are losing one limb, losing three limbs, losing no limbs, and being eaten completely. However, being left with 3 limbs is arguably more than 3x better than being left with 1 limb. Being left with 1 limb leaves you basically useless (and vulnerable to predators, but being left with 3 limbs you can recover from. Also, being rational, Crispy and Chewy would know that if no alternate deal is reached, both would choose to sacrifice the other and they would be left in pain and basically useless with only one limb each. As such, it is in both of their best interests to end up with 3 limbs instead of 1, assuming they can trust each other enough to know the other one will do as they have agreed. If they did not discuss this, they would both sacrifice the other, however, being able to discuss it ahead of time, they could agree to both spare the other. This leaves them at risk of the other betraying them, but it also optimizes their chances of surviving afterwards. Remember that they’d be left with one limb each for the rest of their lives, and it’s quite possible those lives would be short and miserable with only 1 limb.
Watching this video just leaves me in awe of the zero escape games, especially virtues last rewarded, as a huge part of the gameplay is based on the prisoner’s dilemma. To anyone interested check the games out. In my opinion they are an extraordinary experience and become even more interesting the more you learn about the theories. :)
I'll add to this for anyone reading: Zero escape: virtue's last reward (VLR) is a visual novel/puzzle game that takes place in an unknown location facility, with 9 people who periodically will have to make the choice of the prisioners dilemma with a few added elements
-Players start at 3 points
-Being betrayed substracts 2 points
-Cooperating adds 2 points to both parties
-Betraying adds 3 points
-Reaching 0 points will kill the player
-Reaching 9 points gives the opportunity to the player to escape the facility
This adds more layers of choice and complexity, you could apply the concepts of the infinite prisioners dilemma but if you get betrayed twice you'll be dead. if everyone were to cooperate 3 times, everyone gets out, but people get impatient and mistrust others in a stressful life or death situation, some may even be malicious, and with this line of thinking, they could get out in 2 rounds if they betray twice if they get to convince the other party to cooperate
@@inari3217 what I like is that logically, you need to betray asap, because even if you were both planning to betray, if it both counts, both get 1 point. But you can't betray someone who already backstabbed you.
No, the logic in that game didn't follow this. Some of the characters in the game used that explanation, but it didn't apply because the situation was different. It was closer to the Infinite Dilemma because there was no serious penalty for losing the first round. Keep in mind, there was also no serious benefit for betrayal (escaping one round earlier is irrelevant because they have infinite rounds to succeed).
The most logical solution was to cooperate every time, because your choice was public and you couldn't win on the first round. If you ever chose to betray, everyone would know it, and everyone would, or at least should, proceed to betray you on every subsequent round, meaning you would never escape. If I remember correctly, I don't think anyone in the game ever acknowledged this, which led to over half the characters falling into the trap of picking betray for absolutely no reason. It wasn't good writing, in my opinion.
I caution anyone thinking of playing Zero Escape to please think for yourself. Virtue's Last Reward only had 1 truly malicious actor, so the decisions didn't quite make sense. Also, avoid the 3rd game, it's a plot hole dumpster fire.
@@Manavine If both people choose betray, neither would gain or lose any points.
One of my favorite game series!
Option 3:
Chewy: "It's a good thing we went on our walk with our guns, right Crispy?"
Crispy: **pumps shotgun** "It's fox season."
and then they shot the fox, skinned it, sold the pelt for a large amount of money, then they lived happily ever after
@@enderlordex9396 no they used the money to become drug sellers and enter a gang and get girls and use flour, days later crispy was caught by the donut police, and chewy smoked way too many pockys and died of lung cancer
2A
Good ol’ Murica
@Winter White yep, be carefull with pockeys
I felt like I understood everything until the MATHS came
Yeah sure, Albert Einstein.
The math isn't super important to the concept imo, it's just a mathematical proof of The Golden Rule.
I understood that Delta was a messed up G instead of a D... if that wasn’t the point I don’t know what is.
@Supreme ideology
It's a pretty simple concept.
Delta is the amount you care about future losses.
0 being not at all. And 1 being the future is equally important to you as much as the present is.
Everyone on earth is more present-focused that future-focused. But they do still care, so it isn't 0, or 1, but a fraction in between.
If you are offered 1 candy today and told if you don't eat the candy, you will get an extra candy tomorrow, whether eat the one you have or wait for two entirely depends on your delta value.
If your delta value is ½, then any future gains that can be made are halved in value to you.
Meaning that the 2 candies in the future have an equal value to you than the one candy you have right now since those future candies are half as important to you. So you could go either way.
If your delta value is ⅓, then the future candies have a value of 0.667 ( 2 * ⅓), meaning you'll always EAT the candy you have now, which is 1.
If your delta value is ⅔, then the future candies have a value of 1.333 ( 2 * ⅔), meaning you'll always WAIT for the 2 candies in the future, which are worth more than 1.
The last bit of math is basically in a summary, to say that if you write the infinite series for the outcomes for each strategy (in the case of the video, 1 vs 3 vs 4 limbs of loss) and setting them equal to one another, and calculating the value of delta, you can get the minimum value of important required to always choose the outcome of cooperating.
*_3 / (1 - δ) = 4 + δ * (1 / (1 - δ))_*
Solve that, and the answer is ⅓. Meaning in this specific scenario, for those outcomes, as long as your delta value is equal or greater than ⅓ you will always cooperate.
This website will solve the equation for you:
www.wolframalpha.com/calculators/equation-solver-calculator
You can change the values to see what it does.
Let's say instead of losing 1 limb when they cooperate, they lose 2 instead.
*↓*
*_3 / (1 - δ) = 4 + δ * (2 / (1 - δ))_*
Solving that gives the answer ½, which means if you were gonna lose 2 limbs from cooperating, you would have to value the future higher in important to cooperate, which makes sense.
Having a worse outcome makes cooperating worse, so you'd have to value the future even more.
Nahhhh. Just think of it as: The things you choose/ decide on today will have consequences in your future, whatever the consequences may be, the value of those consequences depend entirely on the degree of importance you assign on it. However, it will impact you nonetheless-- if the consequence is adverse to you, it makes "cooperating" or choosing the "generally favourable" option difficult.
If someone says I understood it wrong, then there goes my 4 minutes down the drain to waste.
Had to watch this twice because the animation was so beautiful that I wasn’t paying enough attention to the information the first time!
"the smug fox runs off with a belly full of gingerbread, leaving the two former friends with just one leg to stand on."
the one gingerbread man standing on his arm:
That fox is the scariest thing I've seen all morning.
I just saw it before bed.
My feet aren’t coming out of my sheets.
Yeah
@@gusevans3817 🦊 Boo!
I'ma get nightmares tonight.
I took one look at the thumbnail wand was like “yo what the fu-“
I would tell the gingerbread couple "At least one of you has green eyes"
Of course, but which wand should the wizard take to win the tournament?
@@stephendonovan9084 Forget the wand, what you need is a laser cutting tool for the werewolf antidote
Ohh and add “And the other one is colorblind”
@@Entias bahaaa the references
Just rember to go back to the initial chamber after doing so, otherwise you won't be able to form an Euclidean path
How to beat the prisoner’s dilemma:
Don’t use game theory.
Just want to give some appreciation to the awesome animators who put this together, love the style!
“But as long as they *go out on a limb* their friendship will never again be half-baked.” They never fail to amuse me.
That, along with the “crummy” pun right before it really buttered my croissant if you know what I’m saying
@@jmstudios3049 ufff😂
trick question: the gingerbread men have to eat each-other to assert their dominance over the fox
Hmm kinky
The fox just leaves out of disgust
cannabalism
They already eat each other at the gingerbread house
@@clarkepercivaljaeblood4886 let's pretend that never happened
a salute for the amount of work they did to show the movements of the characters and environments
Dude every time I see this intro I have a flashback to the class clown in my history class screaming “OOH! TED ED!” Whenever he saw we were watching one of these in class. It was his favourite channel and he was so excited, and here I am almost 10 years later and I literally can’t forget it 😂
I tried to understand this but I chose spare and my brain chose sacrifice.
The ultimate betrayal, you cant even trust your brain
What don't you understand? I would be happy to explain.
@@ProfessorTenebrae explain to me xD
@@maihak6996 Okay well the problem behind this dilemma is the roots of mistrust.
No matter what perspective you take, your best option is always to sacrifice the other.
If they spare you, your options are:
Spare them: Lose 1 limb.
Sacrifice them: Lose no limbs.
If they sacrifice you, your options are:
Spare them: Lose 4 limbs.
Sacrifice them: Lose 3 limbs.
So you would ALWAYS sacrifice the other wouldn't you?
@Gciso10 I Gaming Like I said, if going off your own perspective, you never would. Like I said in my other comment, choosing spare from your perspective always loses you more limbs.
On the whole it makes sense to both cooperate and spare, as the total limbs lost is less, and less pain for each individual, but people don't view things from other peoples perspective but their own. Thats the dilemma.
Let’s just appreciate this animation.
I would like to but the fox is terrifying
Octopus hellacutii understandable
It's so well made and I love it a lot
That's not an animation.
@@snowtime5500 I believe it's called a stop motion animation
Enjoyed this video more than I thought I would. Exemplary content, art direction, and sound design.
At 1:03 When he said "In game theory", i had flashbacks of Matpat saying "but hey that's just a theory, a game theory !!!" lmao
I watch matpat!
that fox is my sleep paralysis demon
Congrats Surviving every night
Its 11 PM here where Im watching and Im having nightmares before Im even sleeping
yeetado yeebedepop 10:43am rn formme
Yikes! We hope he doesn’t haunt you for too long. In the meantime, if you want to find out more about those sleep paralysis demons, may we suggest this video: bit.ly/TEDEdSleepParalysis
@TED-Ed THAT WAS SMOOTH AF
What happens when you factor in the pain of losing a leg every day. How long does it take for Crispy to lose it and beg to be sacrificed every day? These are the real questions
Just end it by jumping into a glass of milk, man.
@@Bennevisie
That would be the equivalent of jumping into acid (not very fun)
@@jeshuajacob5890
No, I got the joke, it's just that clearly this guy doesn't understand optimal gingerbread suicide techniques
But Crunchy seems like the one with a weaker mind tho
Gingerbread Men have no sense of pain. Duh!
Ain't we gonna talk about how adorable these gingerbread men's mouth movements are?🥰
I don't know why but i found the sound of the Fox taking a bite really satisfying
The Quotes at the starting are some of the most valuable pearls showcased by Ted-Ed, just love them.
And the starting and ending music ❤️
True
@@Saranaprasadam true
"We see it play out in real-life situations like trade negotiations and international politics"
*Shows two squirrels fighting over a nut
I see they meant USA politics
Acorn
It's conflict in a nutshell!
That is the most beautiful animation I've seen in a while! 😮🖤
Oh man, I just saw this on the video games series: Zero Escape. More specifically: Zero Time Dilemma!
"Will you spare or scarfice your friend?"
"I will answer when I return"
He never returned.
(Leaves, makes a new friend, is betrayed by said new friend, and returns)
“I will sacrifice THAT friend!”
Legendary
AHAHHAHAHAAHHA
after getting the three dark hairs of the Ted-Ed channel, Crispy returns.
the fox belongs to the wizard who feeds his pet everyday for free
fox is gonna get diabeetus
And the wizard is a paid actor. :v
The fox is also part of the dilemma. If he eats both ginger men completely... he'll starve. He would benefit in the short term/1st round, but starve in the next and every round thereafter.
@@markprothero2666 The gingerbread men are restored before every round.
Such a beautiful infographic. I love the animation!!!
"Is that enough to get these poor sentient baked goods to agree to cooperate?" is the title of my forthcoming book.
me, minding my own:
TED-Ed: "How to outsmart the Prisoner’s Dilemma"
me: How DO you outsmart the prisoners dilemma???
by adding more Rounds to the act. in Short: In real life a Prisoners Dilemma like in Game Theory doesnt really exist
@@svensei5643 Are you familiar with whats going on with GME stock? The only reason im here is cause the GME community keeps tossing around the Prisoners Dilemma as a way to describe the situation.
@@Cptkaliente1 what is GME?
@@SalmonBucket it is a stock ticker that is shorted to oblivion. The hedgefunds will need to buy back every single share making it go to the millions per share
@@Cptkaliente1 i see, interesting
The "eating fox" animation now haunts me.
You’re not alone
Same
great video! revisiting it seemed to only make it hit harder. stellar animation too. thanks for sharing
5:00 "Selfishness is short-term", "peace and cooperation are ideal".
IRS Scammer: Hello your computer told us you have virus?
Why is no one talking about how cool the style of this video is?! I would love more videos in this animation style!
This style should fall under stop motion animation.
Its pretty cool
Why is no one talking about how this makes no sense at all?
While looking like vintage stop motion, maybe it is done using CGI...would love to know how this was done!
Because its a false dichotomy. If the second dilemma were the same stakes and math as the first, then more people would pay attention to visuals.
Literally everyone is talking about it. Take 2 seconds to read a comment
The stop motion, both in design and execution, is simply beautiful! If you, the reader, happen to be someone who worked on this - bravo!
:)
You might enjoy watching 'the fantastic Mr Fox'
@@Stoney-Jacksman My other comment on this video is: "Man I don't remember this scene from Fantastic Mr Fox at all." :D
This is like when your friend tells you a story in the opposite of straightforward way.
The fox on day 530.87801 of eating nothing but Gingerbread: "I'm tired, boss"
The Video: Teamwork leads to a mutually better future.
Me: Detain the fox. Sue the wizard for cruel and unusual punishment and violation of cookie rights.
Yes the cookie police are gonna kill the Fox and stop the wizard whit guumy guns
@@cynthiaedith4122 Aaaaaand now it's Hoodwinked
@@cynthiaedith4122 Plot twist, the cookie police shows up and eat the two cookies themselves, calling it "self-defense".
Its actually called Breadman rights* If you were to say Cookie rights I’d be implying the house (gingerbread house) has rights which it doesn’t. Im a Breadman Rights Activist so yea.
if you watched the whole context the ginger bread men were reaching for their frosting guns.
the sound the fox makes when he bites so for some reason incredibly satisfying
that face will haunt me in my nightmares
I thoroughly enjoyed this!
I love this art style ❤
"As long as they go out on a limb..."
I see what you did there
The last sentence contains 3 puns.
Being a gingerbread man and having a limb eaten or being eaten alive is quite the darkest version of this I’ve heard 😅 usually it’s about splitting some sort of monetary prize
Imagine if they are humans. It becomes 10 times darker.
Well you know what they say about things costing arms and legs.
Strangely this is much more immediately intuitive than prisoners weighing up sentences or some weird bet.
When it's set in the real world, you keep questioning the realism, "What judge would take off 75% of a sentence for good behavior?". But when it's about Wizards and talking gingerbread men, your child brain takes over and immediately knows "ONE LEG GOOD, ZERO LEGS BAD".
In summary, more logic puzzles should involve fairytale elements so we appreciate how simplistic and removed from reality they are.
YOU CLEARLY HAVEN'T PLAYED VIRTUE'S LAST REWARD LOL
@@georgelongcoal1117 VLT is the reason I discovered the prisoner's dilemma and why I love it so much.
I like this theoretic outlook of the prisoner's dilemma! Not something I would have thought about. Thank youtube for putting it in my recommended. While it's true the eternal prisoner's dilemma is more applicable to real life as most of the time agreements between two parties do not result in instant death for one side, most people try to get the most benefit out of the situation. A lot of the time (in my experience) others don't think about the long term too much which makes them more likely to choose selfish decisions which can negatively impact others. Would be nice if there was a realization as long as both survive, they don't have to sacrifice too much from the other person since it's beneficial that way.
Made me tear up, it's so beautiful
This shows the importance of trust and selflessness. At the end of the day, it is very important for a community to trust each other and for each member to give back to the community, because it is the best option for everyone and the future.
Unfortunately this looks utopic given the nature of the human being, look for example at something as simple as environment, we would care alot more about it if we could see the impact of our actions in the short term, but since individually we're not as impacful, generally speaking, we couldn't care less
@@leekeeho543 But we do care about the future, a little - the delta is just a bit less than what you are expecting that's all
@@leekeeho543 you’re a little bit wrong. The fact that humans survived so well is because of taking care of each other and being part of a community.
Caring for others is actually essential for healthy people. We are programmed to be part of a society.
The average person can get sick for real if he spends too much time alone or going on for too many days without having the feeling of being needed and helpful. This is how we survive.
Saying the human nature is to betray is actually wrong, dangerous and toxic thinking. Human nature is to be part of a group while being able to identify as an individual with own personality. To be able to listen to others and to be heard by them.
We also care about future. That’s why we have schools and economy. You don’t need a system of money if you don’t care about the future. You learn stuff and you teach the next generation what you have learned so humans can survive better
@@spir013 We are not really programed to be part of a society. What we are programed for is long term vs short term gain.
Currently we are moving more and more to short term gain as longer term is getting moved further and further out of reach.
Its illustrated pretty well in the video when you do not care about tomorrow you will be selfish. Current western society there is no need to care about tomorrow, your needs will be provided for you regardless on if you have a job or not.
Rasco total war not true - we're highly social animals. we experience worse outcomes when extremely isolated because we are driven to be social. if we took other species who are not social and gave them the intelligence to work through the dilemma, it would be a different story. people ARE often selfish, but it is still true that we benefit from social bonds.
Can We Just Stop And Appreciate How Good This Guys Animation Is.
Its stop motion
No we can't
insane how much better the veritasium video is in terms of followable information, although i'm glad TED talked about delta
All of the animations are phenomenal. How do they do this?!
You'd think after at least one day the Gingerbread Men would become wise enough to either avoid or fight back against the fox.
Fox: "Who shall I chew on today?"
Chewy: "Chew on this!"
*Pulls out hunting rifle*
Why is everyone commenting for the gingerbread men to hunt the fox XD
@@winturswonderlan9191 Because it makes little sense for the Gingerbread Men to just let themselves get mauled everyday. Unless they're enjoying it, but let's not open up that can of worms...
@@winturswonderlan9191 theyre rational gingerbread men so it makes sense to retaliate, nobody loses any limbs and the fox is dead. it seems pretty rational
@@anarkxi
Maybe they didn't lose their limbs, but instead they lost their gingerbread humanity...
The best option!👍
It’s a know fact that a gingerbread man cannot be caught
I know right. How can they be perfectly rational when their first thought wasn't just to run. I see no rivers, TED-ED!
Run, run, run , as fast as you can....
bro didn't you read the story?
This is why social species are generally cooperative in nature, because it’s always the best outcome for both if it’s an ongoing relationship. It’s mathematical, but it’s instinct generally.
It could be boiled down to simplistic math. If you are 1 and someone comes to harm you -1 (or -2 [depending on scale]) you would have negative outcomes. In order for us to find common ground or laws that we can all accept to at least at admit 1+1=2 (in a simplistic way) forms a society.
4:44 you can see in the background a picture of chewy and crispy and when TED-Ed said its optimal to spare and cooperate forever, the picture turns into a old version of them with one leg lost from both of them, showing they spared each other. nice easter egg TED-Ed.
There was this weird british TV show called golden balls where this was like the ending for a winning duo to see who got all the money, one time a guy told the other contestant he would choose steal 100% and he could either choose steal too and they both lose everything or choose split and he promised to split it with him after, the man was irritated but went along with it because what choice did he have. The balls were revealed and the first man had actually put split and they split the money, tricking the system.
I saw that video in business ethics class in college! I loved it! It was a brilliant strategy!
for those of you who want to see it yourself th-cam.com/video/S0qjK3TWZE8/w-d-xo.html
Wow that is actually really interesting.
Hiachi 47 HAHAHHAAHHA THANKS
The power of forced co-operation
and *That's* how mafia works
Are we not talking about how the fox has an unlimited supply of gingerbread men?
This guy decided to torment gingerbread men because they *looked happy* and the wizard cursed them?
It becomes interesting if you make both gingerbread men identical clones who think the same way and know the same things. If each of them know the other thinks the same as they do, they will conclude that the best course of action is to cooperate, because they know for certain that the other is choosing the same.
I really love the lucidity of this videos script
In the end, cooperation based on free choice is almost always a benefit for all parties involved. The good choice for all is often also what's best for the individual, even though it doesn't seem like it sometimes!
@Abhinav Banerjee Life is, lmao. Science is in: nothing comes from nothing.
sounds like *capitalist propaganda* but okay
@@user-gm3wr9dc9m What are you on about? No credible scientist says that will say that life comes from absolutely nothing since it violates the 1st law of thermodynamics, they simply avoid answering the question altogether; and no life isn't a zero-sum game, you'd know that if you read recent history.
@@anuradhahazarika5090 i read it, and i know that wealth of all 1st world countries comes from slavery and neocolonialism. Every bit of wealth is created by someone.
@@user-gm3wr9dc9m And... What's your point? the What's done in past cannot be changed, I agree on your point about neocolonialism since it's effects on today's society are quite apparent and revealing regardless though it too is something which can be ameliorated especially in this point in time when questions about race exploitation are being raised more than ever, and might I remind you that nothing is static as history has shown whenever inequality rises further old systems of power inevitably bear the burden of increasing discontentment and chaos as all systems of power do, "nothing can stop an idea whose time has come" it only takes 10 percent of people to change any opinion on a particular thing (look it up its an actual point at which popular opinion invariably shifts).
That fox must have a great time every day, cookies taste good.
Oml ur right but i have a confession to make...........I never had a ginger bread cookie , only the normal choco chip cookies
Yep, you same as me
*"The fox eventually got diabetes and die"*
I am hungry now
Until you realise it also got punished by being stuck in this infinite timeloop eating nothing but gingerbread
I remember learning this in economics in High school but this video explains it so much better!
While watching this video, I kept looking behind me because whatever those concepts and equations were, they flew over my head faster than I knew of their existence.
"So can you teach me how to outsmart the prisoners dilemma?"
"Best I can do is how to outsmart the infinite prisoners dilemma" 😐
So the only way to outsmart the prisoners dilemma is to make it eternal. Yikes.
@@reyne2077
or make last more than one round...
Only way is if you have external agreement. For example, if you are brothers with a super close bond, and talked about it beforehand. Or if you have hitmen to kill the other if they don’t choose correctly. Otherwise it is doomed.
@@wh3elson
Alternatively, you can offer them a glass of choccy milk to tip the scales in favour of sparing
@@reyne2077 and did they really outsmart it? Is getting your leg eaten every day "outsmart ing" the fox?
“Mr. Fox, I choose not to choose. Do your worst.”
The truth of all of these situations is that your captor is lying to you. You are both already dead. Keep your integrity.
You might be right. But you're not considering that if the fox is lying or not doesn't really matter, the real problem here is that the situation is gonna repeat forever. Therefore is best to end up doing what causes less harm to both... They are friends after all.
I don't agree. As a consequentialist, I think that this approach gives you the worst possible outcome. What they said would happen to you isn't necessarily the worst thing they could possibly do. If they want to do their worst they'll do it, if they didn't want to you're goading them into it.
Wouldn't just sparing the other prisoner and accepting whatever outcome be the integrity play? I wouldn't want my actions to cause another prisoner to suffer more even if I accept I don't get out of the situation alive.
What difference does keeping your integrity make if you're dead anyway?
@@Ponera-Sama If both decisions lead to your death. Not choosing anything or choosing to spare the other. Why not just choose to spare them? Does integrity matter after your dead? perhaps not, but by that logic, does it really matter when you're alive? It's just a matter of principles.
So the gingerbread men decided what to do, faced with the reality of their own mortality they realised: the best move was to not make a move at all. The only chess mate available was to not play for one.
An unexpected twist and a better ending of the Prisoner's Dilemma. By sacrificing their present, they pray for a better future, and stay as friends forever. It would have been better if the sacrifice was less extreme, but I think this tells me that even the worst dilemmas can have a good solution. Thank you for the good video.
This animation is ridiculously well made and absolutely magnificent
Why is this animation better than most multi-million dollar studio's efforts?! Well played!
May you follow me please
It's so ridiculously gorgeous
"Trade negotiations and politics"
Shows squirrels arguing over acorn
Edit:Thank you everyone who liked. Have a nice day.
Technically, it is
@@strawberrycucumber88 True.
Must've watched rick and morty
*Don’t bring that political controversy into this comment section*
I didn't get it. Can someone explain?
this reminds me a lot of the roman republic, the romans had 2 consuls and both had veto power over the other so no one used it, because if you use it the other guy will use his veto on you in every law you tried to propose
thats so beautifully well done wth I couldn't focus on what he was saying because I was so distracted with the visuals. That was mesmerizing. So pretty. On another note, anyone understood the math?
The absolute smugness you can hear when he chains three puns together is insane
@Bogrilla En Pointe 5:14
But if Chewy and Crispy worked together they could have eaten the fox
Gingerbread men don't have tummies
@@redhot663 but they eat little versions of themselves at 3:32
@@topanimation9554
We've got a bigger problem now
Cannibalism?
Worse-
The eating babies type cannibalism (?)
Damn these gingerbread men are sick wtf who eats babies-
This art style is wonderful
This started simply and then escalated quickly and lost me 🤣
Imagine being put in this awful situation and a wizard decides that you deserve to be punished because you did the only rational thing while your tormentor not only gets free without punishment, but is also rewarded with an eternity of daily cookies.
Wolves gotta eat, yo. Do not hate the wolf for its nature. In fact, consider that it could have just eaten both and be done with it, but chose mercy.
but the rational thing is to not sacrifice your friends. better for both to survive with 1 missing limb vs 3.
should your friend chose to throw you under the bus its fine because at least you were able to protect them.
@@Kittsuera You missed part of the point of the prisoner's dilemma. If you put yourself into a *purely* selfish perspective, if your friend picked Spare, the best choice for you would be Sacrifice because that way you get to keep a limb. If your friend picked Sacrifice, the best choice for you would still be Sacrifice because you get spared getting fully eaten.
That's why the rational, immediate short-term decision is to sacrifice, but if you care about this potentially happening again (to say nothing of the obvious ethical implications) Spare is the best decision.
@@darthvaderreviews6926 from a purely selfish perspective, wouldn't you want to keep your friend? you loose a lot more by sacrificing them. further, being made of ginger bread means you could replace a missing limb with a little baking and some frosting. you can't however replace the friend.
the whole premise fails with the line "your friend"
if it was a random stranger it might hold more water as an argument.
Sacrificing "your friend" just to save a limb means you were not their friend, just a leech pretending to be their friend.
then, if that being true, can you be certain they are also not a leech? if they also sacrifice you both loose 3/4 of your limbs. and in the middle of the forest that mean nether can get away or survive should some other danger come up.
maybe the rain comes and you both dissolve into a soggy mess.
a true friend would trust their friend not to sacrifice them. and even if they did, at least your sacrifice would save them.
@@Kittsuera You're taking the situation being presented *much* too literally. The reason why it's called the Prisoner's Dilemma is because the original layout was about whether or not two arrested criminals should confess to take a plea deal or keep quiet and it had nothing to do with friendship necessarily.
The fact that they're gingerbread friends in the woods being tortured by a horrible fox and perhaps more horrible wizard is cute window dressing for the math but not relevant.
The thing that always bugs me in these scenarios is...when do they decide to break the cycle and cooperate to eliminate the fox all together???????
Or just stay in the house.
Exactly. All of these unrealistic scenarios. Just shoot the damn fox.
It's the wizard they should go after. Assuming it's a loop, the fox would "reset" too. Common ground and reason for fox to cooperate.
Hi Marx. Say hi to Satan for me.
I know your comment was a joke. Mine was too.
Oh, I didn't know you also have a stop motion animated video! It is great!
The animation helped me pay attention, very informative and cool