Leaf-blowers and Stadium Seating: Group vs. Individual Rationality

[lord_carbo]

Originally Posted by Kilroy_x

If all agents act of their own accord to reach 3 3, then that's fine. The likelihood of this is very low however.

There's always rational foresight and/or compromising. In fact, a good deal of issues that are solved by compromising have a model not unlike the prisoner's dilemma.

Originally Posted by Kilroy_x

Also, "undesirable" doesn't work as a description because yes, by definition, if a person takes an action voluntarily to acquire something they desire it. However, since the equilibrium is only achieved because of a chain reaction of unwanted events, perhaps it isn't voluntary.

Wait, hold on, were you referring to 1 1 as the inferior outcome or 3 3 as the inferior outcome?

Originally Posted by Kilroy_x

Nevertheless, it is extremely unlikely that the situation could be effected in any way to achieve something beyond the equilibrium, at least outside of theory, simply because any mechanism introduced to do so will have both cost and likely third party effects of its own.

You changed "impossible" to "unlikely." Yes, we know that in most scenarios, it is unlikely. You were saying it was impossible, though.