sense mutual contempt between some members and keynote speaker from overheard snippets of conversations.

 

[look up SSRN, or social science research network]

 

Synthetic Worlds

 

:before you do research in this field you ushould get a tenured position. (advice  EC gave to a young scholar in 2003)

 

batteries are low, may have to try to type without backlight, the auditorium is amazing. 

 

Cyberian Frontier and it's metaphoric contexts, images of the west an dimperialism are taken as good things -- metaphors of Remington and Russel are used to introduce Castronova.

 

Castronova wants us to play  multiple simultaneous 3 player games. The rules are too complex for me to follow quickly. They have  fractions and math. I have to improve my arithmetic skills. Secret move and simultaneous play game.

 

Asks for 3 volunteers to play. Michael (M), Laura (L) and Vladic (V) are all going to play

 

Rules:

 

• N coins in the middle
• 3 Players
• Object: get coins
• Each round, each player may remove coins from the middle
• A player cannot take more than N/3 coins
• Moves are written on a piece of paper (in secret)
• The papers are shown (to the other players) at the same time
• The coins left in the middle are doubled
• Play again
• When N < 3, the game ends.

 

 

Castronova assebles volunteers on the middle of the stage and chides the remaining audience members for their non-participation

 

(didn't get how many coins in middle to begin, seemed random) 

Round 1: M takes 1, V takes 1, L takes 2;

Round 2: M takes 1, V takes 1, L takes 2; (didn't get how many there were)

Round 3: M takes 1, V takes 1, L takes 4; six coins left in middle (doubles to 12)

Round 4: M takes 1, V takes 4, L takes 4; three coins left double to six

Round 5: M takes 1, V takes 2, L takes 2; 1 coin is left, double to 2

this ends the game.

M ends with 5, V with 9, L with 14.

 

 

 

Needs 3 more volunteers, for a modded version of this game.

Yulian (Y), Makoto (M), Celia (C), and Michael (M) remains as player 4 (the dictator)

 

Mod the rules:

 

• now add a dictator Player 4
• Player 4 taxes each player 1 coin per round
• Player 4 commands the other player
• Players who disobey are killed and replaced

 

Dictate 1: is to take only one coin this round.

M takes 1, C takes 1,  Yulian rebels and takes 2

M sends Y off, recruits Replacement (R)

Dictate 2: take 0, 1 or 2, and no more

C takes 2, M takes 2, R takes 2; Michael takes his tax; 8 left in center (doubled to 16)

Dictate 3: same as last round

C takes 2, M takes 2, R takes 2; Michael tax taking; and, 10 left in middle

Dictate 4: take 0, 1, or 3; (Michael has 15 in his hand)

C takes 3, M takes 0, R takes 3; Tax taking; 14 left in the middle

[M has been trying to make  his dictates so that players can take only 1/6 of the coins left in the  pot, this would theoretically let the pot grow infinitely]

 

 

 

Now Mod it again

 

Make it a democracy 

 

• -before play begins-
• All players may suggest 1 rule
• All players vote on the proposed rules
• First rule with 2 votes wins
• -play-
• any player may accuse another player of breaking the rule
• Trial by jury: Guilty players are killed and replaced

 

 

Justin (J), Bryan (B), Robert (R) volunteer

Three proposals are  given,

the Justin rule is voted in, ( I missed the rule, but six coins are left, doubled to 12)

they each take one

they each take one again, 9 coins remain, double to 18

[can only propose rules at the start of play]

they each take one, 15 coins remain, double to 30

[they are colluding about their tactics and strategies]

[they could form a social contract as part of their collusion]

[this is explicitly against the rules of secrecy]

J takes 10, R takes 10, and Bryan takes 1

Bryan accuses them both (J and R) of cheating

trial by jury ensues

the jury returned an innocent verdict because two of the jurors were also the accused

 

 

 

What did we see? The interests of the player are independent of the administration of the game. We saw anarchy, dictatorship, and democracy modeled in that order

 

This is a political science problem that is age old, it its the tragedy of the comons. The economist is tellling us that markets fail and that when they do, something has to be done.

 

What is the most efficient regime for banning players who break the rules?

 

not a questiono of who has property rights. 

 

Response A: " I don not care that players break the rules"

 

common property damage of real money trade on in game economies. (?)

 

Amazing graph, that includes social cost

 

When someone damages the magic circle it hurts everybody.

 

his conclusion is that too much real money trade is bad, the optimum is greater than zero, but less than what it is now (eg overfishing, over exploitation of resources)

 

[economics that I don't understand]

 

Rules of the game need to be respected in the same way that the rule of law is respected.

 

response B: "I should be free to do whatever I want"

Castronova says "who are you"

Player libertarian argument, player can do whatever she wants with her resources and property. Converse arguement: Designer should be able to do whatever she wants, she is "god"

 

Response C: "The government must decide" 

any time community and individual interests come into conflict then govenment becomes involved.

 

Covenants (Bartle and Fairfield argument) from wikipedia. The real estate limiting covenant seems to be the right model.

 

bottom line, set some ruels, and play by the rules.

 

Why do the rules matter?

 

sacredness of the magic circle

 

players are debating the nature fo the social contract.

 

Castronova looks at the sacredness of the magic circle as necessary for human dignity.  He offers a capsule biography of JRR Tolkein and the need for "escape", EC proposes replacing the word "escape (escapism) with refuge, the fantasy is a refuge on the way to home, a safe(r) place... He brings references to Jung, Einstein, and shows rivendell and a cathedral's rose window. Putin is quoted on terrorism.

 

These are now important to EC because he has now fallen in love and had a child. He is now invested in the future of humanity in ways that he wasn't before (my comment)

 

There are two parts of the talk,

 

it seems that there is a need to protect the social contracts in games because they are the first time that we have been seriously interrogating the social contract in 300 years. Also that we need to protect fantasy as a refuge from an imperfect reality.

 

The questions seem to be from people who are having trouble going to the same place with EC who has gone to a poetic and philosophical place. 

 

There is some disagreemnt on the strength or suppleness of the magic circle

 

EC is arguing for diverse ecologies, protecting people who are trying to do different things.