Options and Moving Parts

When making a statistical study you limit the options of possible answers so as to make comparisons easier. There are different degrees of this, but whether cardinal or ordinal, there certainly isn't a free form of organic options, such is human reality. When we think of games we often think of the moves available as categorizable. In American football the players performances may vary extremely, but the rules definitely limit the options of "moves."

One way of adding move variability is in making the arbitration mechanism binary or cardinal, but this is just a framework that gives shape to the play field, which is free form. Examples are voting and reputation ranking.

One way to simulate human society would be to collect each option, as they are realized, in a relational database, where different options could be ranked under conditions, and still be associated with specific people, times, et cetera.

Information Costs

Many games assume the players know all the rules and have an equally universal assessment of the value of all resources. In the board game Monopoly the only unknown is the outcome of dice rolls. The cost of improvements, rent, property, and number of properties per set, is all known so one might assess the value of each pair. The game of Clue, however is all about research costs, the winner is whoever has the lowest. The shortest route and the best recall of the information, suspects and potential murder weapons and the rooms, is going to win, with a slight deviation based on statistical outliers in the form of consistently high dice rolls.

In life we could benefit from knowing as much as we can. And we can know almost everything about now and extrapolate a lot about tomorrow. We can be aware of interest rates, average wages per industry and region, property values, stock market trends. We can also know a lot about ourselves. Where are we spending our resources? How much are we putting in to each task and how much are we getting out?

Game Theory of Romance: Part 1

Game theory is a way to map decisions with cost-benefit analysis that takes into account all of the "moves" in each set, and the degree of knowledge of the moves made by others. What does this look like if we apply it to the oldest game, the Game of Love? This is the first in a series that will explore different aspects of this.

In the first scenario we will assume this is a relationship between two arbitrarily chosen people, statistically average, and only their moves are of consequence. They are already in a romantic relationship with each other, will it stay that way?

Let's say they each get an amount of utility between 1 - 10 from being with the other, variance determined by many minute decisions by that person, their partner, and circumstantial details. If that person is rejected their utility is zero, if it is mutual rejection utility is two, and if they reject the other without being so in return utility is four. Now, due to inertia, the lover will not reject unless utility falls below four, because the rejection value is four, this assuming simultaneous decision making and transparency of intent.

If the lover's partner is difficult to understand, poor communications, erratic, then rejection becomes inevitable because the payoff of rejecting, four, is greater than that of mutual rejection and longer you wait the more opportunities to be rejected. Another trait that would increase desire to reject is if the partner places a high discount on future utility, that is, they don't place much value in planning for the future. In that case you have a partner that will get more than four utility from rejecting the lover, as they only see the grief avoided now, not the joy forfeit in the future, thus the risk of being rejected is high and will ultimately be avoided by the lover.

Re Reputation

Reputation systems as economic and business models have been spreading in popularity over the past decade or two as the idea has gone the usual route from academia, to science fiction and environmentalists, and then the business community. I've been fascinated with it for some time, going away and coming back, and I feel another attack of love sickness coming on.

Real quick topic warmer, Amazon.com is regarded as having the most successful and earliest contemporary, read Internet age, manifestations via their consumer sales. However, this ranking is limited to what they sell. Google, with search voting, the "+1" option, allows seamless reputation voting of everything networked.

Ideas and Patents

I have two fairly solid ideas that need to be codified and then at least one of them submitted for patent approval. Worst part of all of that, if there is a bad side, is not feeling free to share my enthusiasm completely due to needing to protect my intellectual capital from unscrupulous opportunists. Expressing my excitement means a lot to me, those feelings are largely the positive reinforcement for my creativity.

The one that is most ready for marketing and being patented will be getting its own website soon where the potential fruits can be trumpeted and donations be solicited. I'm going to work the environmentalism angle on this and try to get a decent starting capital without exposing myself to much personal financial risk.

Mental Puzzles and Present-ness

On this blog I have written much about large trends and movements in society itself, but not as much about very present, human-scale issues. Turning one's focus back to the here and now is exactly what this entry is about. You'll hear the wise talk about being present, that is: not fixating on the past and not fretting about the unknown future. That is the goal of the following method, but also being spatially present, as well. If there is something happening, or you believe it to be happening, right now but not in your immediate situation, then it is something to be avoided along with the past and future. If somewhere a deal for ten thousand shares in Google is taking place, but not where you are, it would be best your thoughts turned away from it.

Imagine your mental landscape as a maze. The dead-ends are the fears, delusions, obsessions, and insecurities which can derail and dominate our energies. In the middle are your values, ethical and aesthetic. We might cite our values when in a dead-end in some intellectual grooming to excuse our choices, but not until we dig our way out from the maze's depths can we be our mental identity.

Our journey for a healthy mental state doesn't end there. We can only be the maze center for a moment before we reflect, therefore we must choose quickly to re-focus our attention outward. In our model of the mental landscape the maze is two dimensional and can be seen superimposed upon our bodies. When we are focused internally the orientation is a plane that doesn't intersect the sense organs; imagine the maze starting in your frontal lobes and slanted down through the torso. When we get to, and become, the maze's center we can reorient the mental landscape to intersect the eyes, the skin, let it drift down to touch the nose and tongue, and experience the here and now. Sometimes we don't like where we are, but if that opinion is to mean something we have to live it.

Cyclic Pressures and Shipping

First, my apologies for the absence and thank-you for reading.

In this depression consumers are pulling back on the "extra." One example is the speed of items shipped. Many online ordering services offer a discounted, often free, shipping option which takes the most amount if time to arrive. This most modest option often employs the US Postal Service in the United States.

It would be interesting to know how the percent of online derived business for private porters has been effected. Likewise, how has the US Postal Services position as "shipper of last resort" effected the national revenue at a time of financial austerity.