26

Re: Nash's balance

Hello, IncremenTop, you wrote: IT> but even me caused on interrogation both in FSB, and in Office of Public Prosecutor for harmless expressions. It is possible particulars? Or gave a subscription about nondisclosure? . It is possible to write "I cannot speak about it", all of us understand

27

Re: Nash's balance

Hello, Vlad_SP, you wrote: V_S> And even more malicious to language say that shopkeepers select a place not casually, and for what it is paid is equal.... Therefore there are they  anchored exactly on Gaussiane. For cannot make a step on another's operational section (yes-yes, all remember, what happens to infringers of the convention?). Also arrange these paid places on , being checked with tables of Bradisa.

28

Re: Nash's balance

Hello, Vedmed, you wrote: 1. It is more favourable to rise on an input/exit on a beach without dependence, from, where the middle. It if it is. 2. Gaz stations  around strategic points - decouplings, departures from cities, shops etc. it is not dependent from each other. Yes well . Decouplings and so difficult that still with priming to be soared. I call in normally on where journey is obvious, and evolutions are convenient.

29

Re: Nash's balance

Hello, Vedmed, you wrote: On a Murmansk route of a gaz station stand on decouplings, instead of there where convenient arrival Because leaving on a route, all strive to refuel. Therefore as the devil only knows, where there the following. I do not think that it is very clever. And on , after congress though it was more convenient to make arrival in other place After congress, from MKAD to  it is normally possible to find more often primings of pieces of 10 primings, what for to use first inconvenient - not clearly unless absolutely gasoline does not remain. And on MKAD a heap of primings not on decouplings.

30

Re: Nash's balance

Hello, Anonim931, you wrote: At us shops often gather in a heap. Gaz stations - it is the extremely rare. Strategist Nash such strategist. In a fire chamber.  the author of strategy of cold war, on . Its influences on the modern world generally are difficult for underestimating. But yes,  concerning shops,  and choices to Neshu it is farfetched. But like as Nesha is difficult for reproaching with it - it of anything similar and did not state.

31

Re: Nash's balance

Hello, Vedmed, you wrote: It is very clever, because between turns of 30-50 kilometers, it is few settlements, only those for which decoupling. And that to them to go kilometers 15-20 from a decoupling. In limits  it not so. Even on  their Egoryevsk full, everyone 2-3. What for to use first just it is clear - because gasoline comes to an end. Especially if in cork stood last kilometers 15 before . For 15 before MKAD is normally some primings, from the Route and , to Lukoil, only absolutely cheap untitled meet rarely, but it is that case, "gasoline came to an end" when at the price not so look.

32

Re: Nash's balance

Hello, Vedmed, you wrote: I about a Murmansk route. Similarly on Arkhangelsk, in the Vologda area as. From Tver to Vesegonska of 300 km. On these of 300 km on a route ten primings is less. From which nearby 4 first 30 km from Tver, 2 in Bezhetsk, 1 Red to the Hill and 2 in Vesegonske. That is between primings of 50-70 km Also it is the central Russia. Well i.e. approximately on priming on 1/10-1/20 minimum tanks? It is a lot of, and the majority of drivers not idiots not to calculate. Is, truth, bikers, but survived and capable to go too clever, and though a tank at them small, but also the expenditure is much less. So the place near to congresses by all did not suffice About yes. I only at congress used 1 priming, since it was about the house, Shell, almost did not hinder normal driving, and thus on a frequent route. Such target group, but it not to me can and is.

33

Re: Nash's balance

> Explain, please, as it works, if it is more than sellers 2? Three dealers sell ice-cream on a beach. The beach has the form of infinitely thin three-finite star, which expansion of a ray - 1 km. If  agree, they deliver the carts on 1/2 km from beach center so to clients them will nearby reach and according to their the equal income will be the greatest. It is called "system optimal" or "social Wardrop equilibrium" - social balance. Present that one dealer  and moved the cart to close center, capturing and the and a part of another's clients. What do the remaining? They move the cart to beach center, guaranteeing itself third of clients.

34

Re: Nash's balance

Hello, neFormal, you wrote: F> in northern part is colder, therefore  is in the restrained position, risking business. F> and there would be a beach in shape , such would not be.  should walk on a beach, instead of stand in one place

35

Re: Nash's balance

Hello, andrey.desman, you wrote: AD> You live in Russia, and in nonsense all trust and relay without reflexing. Nonsense consists that it works in the countries of the first world, and does not work in the backward countries of type of Russia? Nonsense in can supporting backwardness? GZ>> each batch advances the program attractive to "the" part of population AD> I is direct I see, how the average voter took programs and started to study thoroughly, and on the basis of them made a choice in favor of that or  the candidate. Who more populist at whom the physiognomy is less disgusting, for that and vote in the majority. Vote heart! The average voter reads the press. It is not enough of it? Our great  daily broadcasts the program. GZ>> or  AD> it generally always suspect and not without the bases, but will suspect even without the bases, enough, that  did not converge, and if converged, means accurately swindled. In all there are causally investigatory communications. And including, why in many countries it works, and in some is not present. GZ>> unequal conditions of candidates AD> It generally is always and everywhere in any country of the world. Who gives you equal conditions? Go and take. A lie. GZ>> the strong incompetence lost AD> About, and here even there is nothing to suspect, when everyone the first in opposition - the professional clown. Though there are still fans of type of Navalnogo... (Putin smoothed out opposition!!! 111 how long!!) AD> thrust the balance there, where and . And, you try to justify poverty of the population, and  our great ! I can help Nothing.

36

Re: Nash's balance

Hello, marcopolo, you wrote: F>> in northern part is colder, therefore  is in the restrained position, risking business. F>> and there would be a beach in shape , such would not be. M> Morozhenshik should walk on a beach, instead of stand in one place unless only in a totalitarian society. In the free society it can stand on one place, and anybody to it tells nothing.

37

Re: Nash's balance

Hello, Vedmed, you wrote: 1. It is more favourable to rise on an input/exit on a beach without dependence, from, where the middle. I suspect that wandering  sells more, as fulfills buyers  an amount of time for unit of the person. 3. Voters do not have necessity to be arranged more or less uniformly or far away from others having a rest, therefore their allocation can be strong not the uniform. Otherwise taken a central position benefited always. Taken a central position benefits always. It proves to be true practice in the west where each choices with in advance unknown result, despite the fact that, what money and minds have been enclosed that this result to predict. Politicians are forced to bring up questions which excite as it is possible  an amount of voters. Or to create such questions.

38

Re: Nash's balance

Hello, Muxa, you wrote: M> They move the cart to beach center, guaranteeing itself third of clients. Does not work. I will remind conditions: the Dial-up of strategy in game for two and more players in which any participant cannot increase a scoring, changing the strategy if other participants of the strategy do not change. What do we have? Three dealers stand at center and receive everyone on all 1/3 clients. But what happens, if any of them moves the cart on 5 meters in any side? Its share grows almost to 1/2, and shares of two remaining decrease to 1/4. It not balance. If players three and more for those from them who is closer to edge, optimal strategy will clamp an average as it is possible more strongly. And at clamped by optimal strategy who will run across and start to clamp the one further all from edge. So article that Gleb - a parcel of rubbish dragged here. She explains, in particular, why there is no difference between one batch (CPSU) and two (democrats and republicans). But with gaz stations it will work only in the event that on each section the amount of players will be exactly legislatively restricted by two and no more.

39

Re: Nash's balance

Hello, Fornications Pavel, you wrote: > does not work. I will remind conditions: > the Dial-up of strategy in game for two and more players in which any participant cannot > increase a scoring, changing the strategy if other participants of the strategy do not change. > That we have? Three dealers stand at center and receive everyone on all 1/3 clients. > But what happens, if any of them moves the cart on 5 meters in any side? > Its share grows almost to 1/2, and shares of two remaining decrease to 1/4. > it not balance. If players three and more for those from them who is closer to edge, > optimal strategy will clamp an average as it is possible more strongly. > And at clamped by optimal strategy who will run across and start to clamp that, > further all from edge. You practically showed all. In case of 3 and more persons - optimal strategy is join, for the purpose of expression of all remaining players. And then, when join is more impossible, strategy passes in above described which conducts to an equilibrium state. > So article that Gleb - a parcel of rubbish dragged here. She explains, in particular, > why there is no difference between one batch (CPSU) and two (democrats and republicans). No. You showed equilibrium of two players. Even when the CPSU got to publicity, it appeared that it consists of two flow. Game rule truth were far from the democratic. > But with gaz stations it will work only in the event that on each section > the amount of players will be exactly legislatively restricted by two and no more. No. With gaz stations, as well as with shops it will work only under condition of a lack of resources. As the resource is finite, and it can exploit one or two players the rule of balance of two works. If more - that equilibrium is in  players, on resources how many suffice.

40

Re: Nash's balance

Hello, GlebZ, you wrote: GZ> You practically showed all. In case of 3 and more persons - optimal strategy is join, for the purpose of expression of all remaining players. And then, when join is more impossible, strategy passes in above described which conducts to an equilibrium state. Does not conduct. If players more than two at least, one player always has a possibility to refine the position for the account remaining. There are no here equilibriums of Nesha.

41

Re: Nash's balance

You are difficult to underestimate In vain so. Clever there was a muzhik and much that made. But yes, about shops and gaz stations of Glebz, of course, ran snowstorm.

42

Re: Nash's balance

GZ> In a dirt there was an interesting notice. Nash's balance or Why gaz stations stand in steams, and results of fair choices are close to 50/50 Who this  wrote? Nash's strategy , A-a-a-a! Why gaz stations and shops often gather in a heap instead of uniformly being arranged on a city. Does not explain. Balance on Nash works for mathematical players theoretical creations. PS Vanguju that is fast in addition to delirium about normal distribution will be added delirium about balance but to Nash.

43

Re: Nash's balance

Hello, GlebZ, you wrote: GZ> In a dirt there was an interesting notice. Nash's balance or Why gaz stations stand in steams, and results of fair choices are close to 50/50 Results of fair choices are close to 50/50 only at pure,  and the settled two-party system. And gaz stations steams stand not too often. But happens and absolutely for other reasons, not because of "beach"... <<RSDN@Home 1.0.0 alpha 5 rev. 0>>

44

Re: Nash's balance

M>> They move the cart to beach center, guaranteeing itself third of clients. > does not work. I will remind conditions: > the Dial-up of strategy in game for two and more players in which any participant cannot > increase a scoring, changing the strategy if other participants of the strategy do not change. > That we have? Three dealers stand at center and receive everyone on all 1/3 clients. > But what happens, if any of them moves the cart on 5 meters in any side? > Its share grows almost to 1/2, and shares of two remaining decrease to 1/4. I changed the beach form in the example. The beach has the form of infinitely thin three-finite star, which expansion of a ray - 1 km.

45

Re: Nash's balance

P> Results of fair choices are close to 50/50 only in pure,  and a mathematical model of two-party system. Corrected

46

Re: Nash's balance

Hello, GlebZ, you wrote: GZ> the Dial-up of strategy in game for two and more players in which any participant cannot increase a scoring, changing the strategy if other participants of the strategy do not change. More in detail in English. Above all is true, but the output is not true, but is characteristic for political strategists: GZ> Nash's Strategy , why gaz stations and shops often gather in a heap instead of uniformly being arranged on a city. She explains results of fair choices: Each batch advances the program attractive to "the" part of the population (left-right) and for central fluctuating group which, as a rule, and outweighs a rope. Therefore, if an outcome of choices strongly unequal (it is more 55-45) always suspect or , or unequal conditions of candidates, or the strong incompetence of the lost. The basic error consists that implicitly is supposed that in essence it is not important to batches to defend what program if only on choices to win. I.e. affirms that there are no the basic political parties with ideology.

47

Re: Nash's balance

Hello, Ops, you wrote: Ops> Also arrange these paid places on , being checked with tables of Bradisa. An ode to militant idiocy (the psychological term). Itself I am not able to think, and at others I will laugh to neigh.

48

Re: Nash's balance

Hello, Dym On, you wrote: DO> Balance on Nash works for mathematical players theoretical creations. DO> PS Vanguju that is fast in addition to delirium about normal distribution will be added delirium about balance but to Nash. It in the Nobel committee address. Type, you morons, I know one all, to dig out Nash and to take away from it the award, and also to take away the award for 2004 Aumana and Schelling for the analysis and the proof of applicability of the games theory in sciences about a society. They are wrong. Write https://www.nobelprize.org/contact/

49

Re: Nash's balance

Hello, Fornications Pavel, you wrote: > does not conduct. If players more than two at least, one player always has a possibility to refine the position for the account remaining. No. On the contrary, cooperation does impossible life of one player. > There are no here equilibriums of Nesha. Balance is finite unattainable result of long-time process. Nobel award of 2004 on economy has been produced for dudes proved influence of long duration on the games theory. If the player considers itself long-time, or process long-time (for example, such as choices) the games theory and aspiration to balance is applicable. If short-term risky strategy with the subsequent output from process are applied.

50

Re: Nash's balance

GZ> It in the Nobel committee address. Type, you morons, I know one all, to dig out Nash and to take away from it the award, and also to take away the award for 2004 Aumana and Schelling for the analysis and the proof of applicability of the games theory in sciences about a society. They are wrong. These fine people are absolutely right, and you are not present. Such here a flourish. PS that comes nearer to I understand, think over that that such the reactor of ideally mixing and the reactor of ideal extrusion and than they differ from the real reactor. Then it becomes a little clear, why balance on Nash well works in the games theory, in the political theory, in the economic theory, in the theory of a rational choice and other theories, and very badly works in practice. PPS and the award it of a distance for: The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel 2005 was awarded jointly to Robert J. Aumann and Thomas a C. Schelling "for having enhanced our understanding of conflict and cooperation through game-theory analysis". . For the outstanding contribution to understanding of the theory of conflicts and the cooperation, developed on the basis of the games theory...