Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!umcp-cs!aplcen!jhunix!ins_akaa
From: ins_akaa@jhunix.UUCP (Ken Arromdee)
Newsgroups: net.startrek
Subject: Re: Mark Leeper's third "Most Human" article
Message-ID: <2098@jhunix.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 5-Mar-86 11:34:05 EST
Article-I.D.: jhunix.2098
Posted: Wed Mar  5 11:34:05 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 7-Mar-86 08:30:55 EST
References: <4474MIQ@PSUVMA> <2054@jhunix.UUCP> <2078@jhunix.UUCP>
Reply-To: ins_akaa@jhunix.ARPA (Ken Arromdee)
Followup-To: net.tv.drwho
Organization: TARDIS Repairs, Inc.
Lines: 22

>>>   There is a major hitch here-- the fact that a piece of logical machinery,
>>>in doing the most logical thing, is perfectly predictable.  This would spell
>>>doom in any battle or conflict, whether in space or on a chessboard.
>> No. There are situations where the most logical thing to do is to make a ran-
>> dom decision, for precisely the reason that it's less predictable--making the
>> unpredictable decision has a higher probablilty of producing the desired
>> result than any predictable decision.  If a machine makes a predictable 
>> decision in such a situation, it isn't "doing the most logical thing".
>I disagree. ... If you're curious for further explination, see the Dr. 
>Who episode entitled "Destiny of the Daleks" with Tom Baker.

This episode is generally considered a bad episode.  I certainly think it is,
and this bad game theory is one of my reasons.

(I have redirected followups to net.tv.drwho)
-- 
Kenneth Arromdee                                               |      |
BITNET: G46I4701 at JHUVM, INS_AKAA at JHUVMS                 -|------|-
CSNET: ins_akaa@jhunix.CSNET                                  -|------|-
ARPA: ins_akaa%jhunix@hopkins.ARPA                            -|------|-
UUCP: {allegra!hopkins, seismo!umcp-cs, ihnp4!whuxcc}         -|------|-
                               !jhunix!ins_akaa                |      |