Comments on: Ron Howard is Not a Game Theorist http://cheaptalk.org/2009/05/13/ron-howard-is-not-a-game-theorist/ A blog about economics, politics and the random interests of forty-something professors Mon, 20 May 2013 00:24:08 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: michael webster http://cheaptalk.org/2009/05/13/ron-howard-is-not-a-game-theorist/#comment-677 Sun, 31 May 2009 23:25:25 +0000 http://cheeptalk.wordpress.com/?p=1309#comment-677 1. I agree that the Nash equilibrium never requires anymore than one person, in essence, to reflect on the problem to arrive at a calculation which will also perform the role of a solution or recommendation.

2. But, I disagree with the view that this is a good video for motivating the attraction of the Nash calculation. On the contrary, the clear instability of the recommended solution, which is nonetheless attractive, speaks volumes against the Nash calculation.

]]> By: wcs http://cheaptalk.org/2009/05/13/ron-howard-is-not-a-game-theorist/#comment-577 Sun, 17 May 2009 15:47:53 +0000 http://cheeptalk.wordpress.com/?p=1309#comment-577 Interesting, for movie, article and comment. But non-transferable and relative-state dependent utility is such a strong assumption.

]]> By: Matt http://cheaptalk.org/2009/05/13/ron-howard-is-not-a-game-theorist/#comment-559 Thu, 14 May 2009 14:35:26 +0000 http://cheeptalk.wordpress.com/?p=1309#comment-559 Crowe Equilibrium: a strategy profile in which every player does strictly better by deviating given the strategies of others. Brilliant!

]]> By: Joshua Gans http://cheaptalk.org/2009/05/13/ron-howard-is-not-a-game-theorist/#comment-549 Thu, 14 May 2009 05:06:17 +0000 http://cheeptalk.wordpress.com/?p=1309#comment-549 I think you’ll find that it is the Nash bargaining solution with non-transferable utility. That only requires Pareto efficiency which given that each man would supposedly have negative utility if another were to date the blonde and the preferences of all of the other women, is the outcome in the film.

]]>