This also shows the dangers of such a method—if Rush gets too powerful, it goes from “You naughty boy, Rush!” to “You naughty boy, critic of Rush!”, like what’s happening now with respect to Michael Steele. And too much extremism can result in evaporative cooling.
William
Karma: 92
The result of two-boxing is a thousand dollars. The result of one-boxing is a million dollars. By definition, a mind that always one-boxes receives a better payout than one that always two-boxes, and therefore one-boxing is more rational, by definition.
Personally, I think the word “win” might be the problem. Winning is very binary, which isn’t how rationality is defined. Perhaps “Rationalists maximize”?
The use of “some of which” suggests that he considers most of the holes to be Fruitful Voids, merely not all of them.
Agreed. TVTropes works very well without any but the lightest semblance of neutrality.
Warning, though: It is horrendously addictive
What does IAWYC mean?
As a sidenote, it’s a very good sign that this discussion has followed the path of
Case studies in medicine are most interesting when all the student doctors disagree with each other.
One warning though: Gambler’s ruin is very possible with betting systems, even if your strategy has a positive expected value.
But if the tribe expands?