Examples of the prisoner s dilemma, what are the life examples of the prisoner s dilemma.

As follows:

1. For example, perfume, no matter how many adjectives you use to describe your perfume, buyers can't tell what it smells like. That's why perfume brands like to offer samples in magazines. Of course, as long as you buy the perfume, you can still know its taste right away.

There are also some products that you buy back and use, and it is still difficult to make an evaluation.

2. For example, it is difficult for buyers to evaluate its effect in advance no matter what, and it will take a long time to make an evaluation after buying back. Others, such as those with durability as their main selling point, have the same problem. So "invalid refund", "extend the shelf life."

and other promises, which can be a signal from the seller.

Introduce. The Prisoner's Dilemma.

It's a game theory.

It has practical significance for sellers. Tmall, JD.com, Amazon.

Feng Shui takes turns, and the rules of the game often change. With the flow and changes of the e-commerce environment, many "dry goods" quickly become useless.

But there is also some theoretical knowledge, no matter how China's e-commerce changes, it will always shine and always bring you new insights and inspiration. Such theories and knowledge should be studied carefully.

<> "The Financial Knowledge Prisoner's Dilemma."

Daily financial literacy.

For example, Chestnut]** arrested two suspects in Orange and Apple, but there was not enough evidence to convict them. So ** imprisoned the suspects separately, met with the two separately and let them make a choice:

If a person pleads guilty and testifies to prosecute the other party (betraying the other party) and the other person remains silent, the person will be released immediately and the silent person will be sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment.

If both remain silent (cooperate), they will also be sentenced to 1 year's imprisonment.

If both of them report each other (betrayal of each other), they will also be sentenced to 8 years' imprisonment.

How to choose oranges?

If this choice happens more than once, will the result be the same?

Prisoner's dilemma] refers to a special game between two ** prisoners, indicating that it is difficult to maintain cooperation even when it is beneficial for both parties.

Get out of the prisoner's dilemma:

Increase the cost of betrayal.

Bringing in third parties.

Repetitive games. Let the betrayal be so big that the other party can't afford it and won't betray.

When I was preparing for class the day before yesterday, I saw the typical case of "Prisoner's Dilemma", and I was very touched, so I came to post a discussion as a lesson for the daily change.

The prisoner's dilemma makes full use of the selfishness of human nature, so it is basically impossible to solve and is often used in case handling.

However, in the book "Murphy's Law", there is a classic case of how to solve this thorny problem. That is, we must learn to trust others, establish a strong alliance, reach a firm tacit understanding, and when making decisions or choices independently, we will think of going together with each other, out of self-interest, based on altruism, and finally get the best results.

The classic case in the book "Murphy's Law" tells how to solve the "prisoner's dilemma".

The British BBC once had a signature game show called "Golden Ball", in which four players participated, and only two players were eliminated to compete for a huge prize money. In the show, the host gives each person two balls, one of which says "Deuce" and the other says "Stolen", from which the two players need to choose a ball. Depending on the choice of two people, three scenarios will arise:

1) If both of them choose "Split", then two people will share all the prizes equally;

2) If one person chooses to "deuce" and the other chooses to "steal", then the person who chooses "steal" takes the entire prize and the person who chooses "deuce" is out;

3) If both people choose to "steal", then both people are out at the same time and will not get a penny. Two people can consult with each other before making their own choice, but they must choose separately when making the final choice.

This is a typical prisoner's dilemma game, which is equivalent to two people colluding in front of **, but still being held in isolation during interrogation. This show took the prisoner's dilemma to the extreme, and at one point no contestant succeeded in taking the prize money.

Because under this rule, if one party tells the other party in advance that he has decided to choose "deuce", and requires the other party to choose "deuce" as well, both parties can jointly assist and the prize can be divided equally. But in fact, when it comes to the final choice, he will definitely choose to "steal", and the other person will choose to "steal" if he doesn't believe him, so the two go home empty-handed.

Later, a player named Nick joined up with his rival Abel. Abel assures Nick that he will choose "deuce", and implores Nick to choose "deuce" as well. But Nick disagreed, firmly stating that he would definitely choose to "steal", and then promised the other party that he would privately divide the prize with the other party after receiving the prize separately.

This lose-lose approach makes the other side very angry. In desperation, Abel could only choose "deuce", but as a result, Nick reversed course and also chose "deuce", and the two shared the bonus equally, and they were both happy.