I looked at the citizens’ comments, and while some of them were notable (@Jesse Hoogland calling for the other side to nuke us <3), I didn’t find anything important after the game started- I considered the overall change in their karma if one or two sides get nuked, but comments from the citizens were not relevant to decision-making (including threats around reputation or post downvotes).
It was great to see the other side sharing my post internally to calculate the probability of retaliation if we nuke them
It was a good idea to ask whether looking at the source code is ok and then share it, which made it clear Petrovs won’t necessarily have much information on whether the missiles they see are real.
The incentives (+350..1000 LW karma) weren’t strong enough to make the generals try to win by making moves instead of winning by not playing, but I’m pretty happy with the outcome.
It’s awesome to be able to have transparent and legible decision-making processes and trust each other’s commitments.
One of the Petrovs preferred defeat to mutual destruction- I’m curious whether they’d report nukes if they were sure the nukes were real.
In real life, diplomatic channels would not be visible to the public. I think with stronger incentives, the privacy of diplomatic channels could’ve made the outcomes more interesting (though for everyone else, there’d be less entertainment throughout the game).
It was a good idea to ask the organizers if it’s ok to look at the source code and then post the link in the comments. Transparency into the fact that a side knows if they launched nukes meant we were able to complete the game peacefully.
I’d claim that we kinda won the soft power competition:
we proposed commitments to not first-strike;
we bribed everyone (and then the whole website went down, but funnily enough, that didn’t affect our war room and diplomatic channel- deep in our bunkers, we were somehow protected from the LW downtime);
we proposed commitments to report through the diplomatic channel if someone on our side made a launch, which disincentivized individual generals from unilaterally launching the nukes, allowed Petrovs to ignore scary incoming missiles, and possibly was necessary to win the game;
finally, after a general on their side said they’ll triumph economically and culturally, General Brooks wrote a poem, and I generated a cultural gift, which made generals on the other side feel inspired. That was very wholesome and was highlighted in Ben Paces’s comment and the subsequent post with a retrospective after the game ended. I think our side triumphed here!
There is something incredibly funny about Mikhail Samin playing General Carter. “There was nothing indicating that Stierlitz was a Soviet spy, except earflaps hat with a red star”.
The game was very fun! I played General Carter.
Some reflections:
I looked at the citizens’ comments, and while some of them were notable (@Jesse Hoogland calling for the other side to nuke us <3), I didn’t find anything important after the game started- I considered the overall change in their karma if one or two sides get nuked, but comments from the citizens were not relevant to decision-making (including threats around reputation or post downvotes).
It was great to see the other side sharing my post internally to calculate the probability of retaliation if we nuke them
It was a good idea to ask whether looking at the source code is ok and then share it, which made it clear Petrovs won’t necessarily have much information on whether the missiles they see are real.
The incentives (+350..1000 LW karma) weren’t strong enough to make the generals try to win by making moves instead of winning by not playing, but I’m pretty happy with the outcome.
It’s awesome to be able to have transparent and legible decision-making processes and trust each other’s commitments.
One of the Petrovs preferred defeat to mutual destruction- I’m curious whether they’d report nukes if they were sure the nukes were real.
In real life, diplomatic channels would not be visible to the public. I think with stronger incentives, the privacy of diplomatic channels could’ve made the outcomes more interesting (though for everyone else, there’d be less entertainment throughout the game).
It was a good idea to ask the organizers if it’s ok to look at the source code and then post the link in the comments. Transparency into the fact that a side knows if they launched nukes meant we were able to complete the game peacefully.
I’d claim that we kinda won the soft power competition:
we proposed commitments to not first-strike;
we bribed everyone (and then the whole website went down, but funnily enough, that didn’t affect our war room and diplomatic channel- deep in our bunkers, we were somehow protected from the LW downtime);
we proposed commitments to report through the diplomatic channel if someone on our side made a launch, which disincentivized individual generals from unilaterally launching the nukes, allowed Petrovs to ignore scary incoming missiles, and possibly was necessary to win the game;
finally, after a general on their side said they’ll triumph economically and culturally, General Brooks wrote a poem, and I generated a cultural gift, which made generals on the other side feel inspired. That was very wholesome and was highlighted in Ben Paces’s comment and the subsequent post with a retrospective after the game ended. I think our side triumphed here!
Thanks everyone for the experience!
There is something incredibly funny about Mikhail Samin playing General Carter. “There was nothing indicating that Stierlitz was a Soviet spy, except earflaps hat with a red star”.
huh, are you saying my name doesn’t sound WestWrongian