It’s gotta be a joke. I hope.
I took the lambdas in the username to mean theyre a functional programming fan, pretty sure they’re joking.
it could also just be a fan of half life and they actually don’t know any better
possibly also just greek I guess
Alex McNeilly is about as Greek as it gets
Lambda is also a symbol of queer activism. Don’t know if that’s the intention here, just the first thing I think of.
It is the joke.
Nah, it’s just a theory.
A GAME THEORY.
I’m indifferent to the content, but I fucking hate that they took the name Game Theory. I can’t talk about this genuinely fascinating topic just about anywhere without kids screaming about the channel.
Game theory is a better name for the YouTube channel than the academic field.
No? It’s a field of math, which are typically called theories, that studies games.
It doesn’t study games, it studies competitive systems. Mathematicians chose to call competitive systems games and that was a mistake.
It studies cooperative systems too. The most specific term that covers everything in it really is Game.
Sounds like somebody doesn’t enjoy competition.
Lol, they just lost at game theory.
And what’s a concise word to describe a system in which participants make decisions within some ruleset where the interaction between each participant’s decisions and the ruleset leads to determining whether each participant wins or loses?
for the longest time, i did know that game theory did not have anything to do with “games” and that it is somehow connected to the prisoners dilemma, but the concept as such wasn’t very clear to me. If you are like my former me, take 30 minutes out of your day and visit https://ncase.me/trust/ to learn and play around with game theory; it’s a great webpage and it’s pretty good fun all around.
We have game theory as an a elective at my uni, the amount of people who signed up for game theory instead of game design is staggering
Those people would benefit from game theory then. Game theory is all about using the information available to make the best possible choice.
Why would I play game theory when I can play actual games?? It’s like reading about sex positions when your horny naked fwb is right next to you, I tells ya!
Some people definitely need to read more fucktheory.
If you want to learn about games you want combinatorial game theory. Traditional game theory isn’t completely divorced from real games either, but comes up more often in economics.
I took Game Theory and the professor’s first name was Patrick. Some ID for something related to the course (that he chose himself) was “patmath”.
It’s been a thing for a century, YouTubers didn’t invent words.
Thatsthejoke.jpg
That’s what I hoped, but none of the commentors seemed to be in on it.
deleted by creator
Game theory final exam:
Full Marks (100%):
You will receive full marks if you answer all questions correctly and at least 70% of the class chooses the “Full Marks” strategy.
If you answer all questions correctly but fewer than 70% of the class chooses the “Full Marks” strategy, your grade will be 90%
Half Marks (50%):
You will receive half marks if you answer all questions correctly but at least 30% of the class chooses the “Half Marks” strategy.
If you choose this strategy and the class distribution aligns as specified, your grade will be 50% irrespective of the correctness of your answers.
Fail (0%) with Incentive:
You will receive a failing grade if you choose the “Fail” strategy or if your answers are incorrect and less than 30% of the class chooses the “Fail” strategy.
If you choose the “Fail” strategy and at least 30% of the class also chooses the “Fail” strategy, you will receive a special incentive: Automatic ‘A’ grade in the next course module, regardless of your performance in this exam.
Additionally, if more than 70% of the class chooses “Fail” or “Half Marks” strategies combined, everyone will fail regardless of individual choices.
I think you need an inverse incentive:
If you are the only one to use “Fail” strategy, you finish with 100% and everybody’s result will be mutliplied by 0.8
The game theory course at my university was called “Poker 101”
Is there a YouTuber/streamer named “Game” or something?
There is a YouTube channel called game theory.
Thank you!
I’m also confused about the that. I searched for game theory on duckduckgo and google and the top results are about the math field. I’ve tried to search “game theory site:youtube.com” and I see videos from the channel “The Game Theorists”. Is that it?
Yes, I forgot that’s what their channel is actually called. They’re known for their catch phrase “but that’s just a theory, a game theory” which is what I remember most about them.
There’s a YouTube channel called Game Theory that spun off a song called “Pokemon Masters are Broke” by the Gregory Brothers.
The main guy, “Matpat” just retired after 10 or so years of YouTubing
It is now an umbrella term for the science of rational decision making in humans, animals, and computers.
Sounds too academic for me
Northernlion class is lectured by the librarian.
I’ll allow it as long as the librarian is bald…
when you drive past the university entrance’s brand new million dollar fountain to get to the shit-tier computers in the cramped as fuck computer lab, then you start wondering if it was always like this
Yes, it was.
Imagine the disappointment of a young Anarchist after joining a Chaos Theory class.
Considering they have a net worth of $45m and $40m, respectively, then yes maybe Academia should have classes and seminars about them. Throw in a MrBeast ($1bn) for good measure.
I wonder what you think the role of academia in modern society should be.
deleted by creator
It depends on what the students want to learn. There are people who want to be scientists, people who want to be teachers, there are also people who want to make money and run a business.
Academia is a place where people can get an in-depth knowledge of the thing(s) they’re interested in learning to help prepare them to be successful in the outside world.
It is a valid and money-making industry to be a profitable YouTuber. It takes planning, strategy, project management, financing, accounting, and various other people skills. Just because it’s YouTube, and just because you may not take it seriously, makes it no less of a viable and marketable skill that could be taught to other people.
Now it’s your turn: what is your idea of the role of academia in modern society?
Advancing the state of human understanding. You’re talking about business school.
Not the other guy but IMO it’s pretty simple. Academia is for the pursuit of knowledge, you learn and the you contribute. That may coincide with making money and running a business but it does not have to. If you want to make money and run a business that’s what vocational studies should be, you learn a trade for the purpose of “being successful in the outside world”. The issue with society today is that we’ve come to glorify higher education and view vocations as some kind of negative. Academia in a modern society should stay focused on the pursuit of knowledge not on the pursuit of churning out degrees to make certain jobs look more legitimate than other jobs. Pursuit of money and running a business should be territory of vocational schools.
There is no pursuit of knowledge in becoming a Youtuber or a Twitch streamer, so it should be taught as a vocation and not as a part of academia.
Considering they have a net worth of $45m and $40m, respectively, then yes maybe Academia should have classes and seminars about them.
According to Credit Suisse, there were 264,200 people with net worth above US$50 million at the end of 2021. That is completely not noteworthy of a mention in any way, on a global level.
I beg to differ. There are over 8,123,000,000 people in the world. Your number (from three years ago) is only 0.003% of the world’s population. That’s less than 1%.
Now, ignoring your fallacy of an argument, just because there are people in other careers that make more money does not mean being successful YouTuber/vLogger is any less viable than any other occupation.
If that were the case, then there are a lot of more traditional roles that we wouldn’t be teaching; like Marine Biologist, who in the US makes on average $57k/year. And yet, Academia still pushes this science (among others) because there is still a demand for it.
And make no mistake, Academia is not going to push subjects that aren’t in demand. They will teach what they feel is in demand enough to attract students.
You seem to be mistaking universities for vocational schools.
And their net contribution to human knowledge is…?
Matt Patt was consulted when evaluating possible outcomes of the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Mmm-hmm.
That is only one aspect of academia’s purpose.
Oh come on mate, I left an open goal for you there.
You could have scored an easy one by saying that their understanding of economic factors in the new media landscape is a relatively new field for study.
You could have talked about the aspects of social discourse and relationships between the maker and the viewer.
Fuck, you could have even framed what they do as artistic expression
But nope, you are too tied up in the misplaced metric of financial success.
And here’s why lectures about that would be next to useless… Their experiences are not transferable. You can’t copy what they do and expect success. That’s because novelty is a factor and you cannot teach that.
Compare that to the scientific method where everything relies on being exactly able to reproduce results.
Sure, there are plenty of purposes for academia, but what you suggest really isn’t one of them.
It’s not. It’s the actual point of academia. It is the one thing you cannot remove and still have academia.
How’s their success mean that there’s another university course made after them.
