Love at Law School

Check out this cool post about love on a law school campus:

http://newlampsforold.blogspot.com/2011/07/economics-of-love.html

Prisoner’s Dilemma: The Draft Script Part 2 of 2

The script continues...

The two suspects both narrow their eyes.

          DISSOLVE TO:

FLASH

The elderly version of the Male Suspect is covered in grey hair, gripping the bars of the jail cell window. Outside, Female Suspect, young as ever, laughs and rides off into the sunset with an expensive car.

  FEMALE SUSPECT

Woo-hoo!

                      MALE SUSPECT

BITCH!

DISSOLVE TO:

FLASH

The elderly version of the Female Suspect has her false denture falling out of her mouth, hitting the bars of the jail cell. Outside, her youthful partner, the Male Suspect steps on the gas pedal of his motorcycle and the engine springs to life.

   MALE SUSPECT

See ya!

         

                       FEMALE SUSPECT

                     (muffled)

Bastard!

    

BACK TO SCENE

             FEMALE & MALE SUSPECT

          (simultaneously)

That’s it he/she is going down!              

   LULU (V.O.)

So the Prisoner’s Dilemma theory predicts that because each player assumes the worst from the other, both will confess and get the medium sentence.

EXT. OUTSIDE THE JAIL HOUSE – DAY

The Male Suspect and the Female Suspect both get released by the COP. Both are startled to see the other. Female Suspect walks up to MALE SUSPECT and slaps him. He looks shock, then slaps her back. Both walk away in anger in the opposite direction.

 LULU (V.O.)

I guess they won’t be working together again. So mutual betrayal beats rotting in jail for a long time, but not as great as walking away scot free!

Prisoner’s Dilemma: The Draft Script Part 1 of 2

Here’s a little scene I wrote about the Prisoner’s Dilemma.  Imagine it as a webisode…

FADE IN:

INT. POLICE INTEROGATION ROOM – NIGHT

A bright lamp shines on the MALE SUSPECT and the FEMALE SUSPECT, who sits side by side each other.

  LULU (V.O.)

So, what is Prisoner’s dilemma? Imagine two burglars get caught and are brought into the police station. Now if they both refuse to confess...

The two suspects shake their heads rapidly, bat their eyelashes in a comic way, and lean close to each other. A menacing COP look on.

LULU (V.O.)

...The police would have to let both of them go due to lack of evidence.

The two suspects smile smugly, kiss, and leave the room in each other’s arm. The Cop looks on grumpily.

LULU (V.O.)

Now if they rat out on each other, they would both get a medium sentence. But if one remains loyal when the other betrays his/her trust, the one who keeps quiet gets the heavy sentence while the betrayer gets a light one. Now imagine if they are being interrogated separately.

Each suspect is alone in their room, looking forlorn.

LULU (V.O.)

If the prisoners trust each other, they should both still refuse to talk. But alone in their cell, they start wondering if the other will confess. Neither wants to get left behind. In their fantasy...

(continued in my next post...)

Game Theory: STDs – To Tell, or not to Tell Part 4 of 4

In my last post I introduced a change in the table, and the power of a guilty conscience.

For some people, that feeling of clean conscience might just be enough to keep them honest. So they move from the upper left corner to either the upper right corner, or the lower left corner. At that point, the other partner might come clean as well, hence the further shift to the lower right corner (since they’re not getting laid anyways).

Or they might not come clean as well. There are those infected ones out there who would love to be the “wronged” party just to hold it against you. This is especially true since this type is rarely in the position to point fingers, and they might relish it.

That’s why I put stars in all three scenarios, to show that all three are possible equilibriums. But regardless of which three it is, sex won’t happen because all it takes is one person to confess for it to stop it. After all, it takes two to tango. And nobody wants to dance with an infected partner.

That’s nice and all, you might argue, but what about the folks who get the mild-tickle type of conscience attack?

That’s why in many countries now, people can be criminally charged for exposing their partner to HIV. Where morals fail, the threat of legal punishment acts as an incentive to behave honestly. The table representing such punishment costs would then be similar to the one representing the moral conscience above.

That’s nice and all, you might argue, but there are plenty of STDs out there that are not as serious as HIV but would still suck to get. What to do then?

That’s why, boys and girls, you should ask for a copy of their doctor’s record. A fresh and recent one, like this Monday’s. Then patiently wait out that HIV three-month window (use that period of time to get to know them better; sometimes you might not feel like sleeping with them once you do that). Be prepared to provide the same proof yourself. Trust no one if they only give you verbal assurances that they’re clean. Be suspicious if they act all hurt and defensive.

If your partner wants to get laid bad enough, he/she will get his/her ass to a health clinic and get some written proof. And if they really really want to get laid, then they could cough up the dough for the faster testing.

Game Theory: STDs – To Tell, or not to Tell Part 3 of 4

In my last post I talked about the table regarding to tell or not to tell when it comes to STD. As it stands no one would confess to having it:  “Under the spreading chestnut tree health epidemic, I infected you and you infected me.” Ouch!

And here is where morals come in. We’ve all got a conscience (people who do bad things just manage to drown out its voice better, or twist its messages to their own needs). Most human beings are generally decent, but rather selfish. The issue of STDs just happens to trigger that sense of self-preservation we all have, since there is a lot to lose by coming clean. 

But most people, when they do bad things, do suffer from varying degrees of conscience attacks. When I say varying, I mean everything from a mild, insignificant itch to a full blown, can’t-sleep-at-night sense of guilt. Let’s see how that guilt could be translated into the table:

	Sex Partner #2 avoids talking about his/her STD	Sex Partner # 2 confesses about his/her STD
Sex Partner #1 avoids talking about his/her STD	Intercourse, Cross-Infection. Both have to live with a guilty conscience.	*No intercourse, No Cross-Infection. Sex Partner #2 can live with a clean conscience.
Sex Partner # 1 confesses about his/her STD	*No intercourse, No Cross-Infection. Sex Partner #1 can live with a clean conscience.	*No intercourse, No Cross- Infection. Both can live with a clean conscience.

(continued in my next post...)

Game Theory: STDs – To Tell, or not to Tell Part 2 of 4

In the last post I talked about the cost of disclosure when it comes to STDs.

On top of the heavy price, it is possible to get away with not telling, especially if your partner is the promiscuous type. He might have no idea who he got it from anyways. And who’s to say he wasn’t the one who passed it on to you in the first place? Remember that episode in Sex and the City, when Miranda was diagnosed with chlamydia? She did the right thing and informed all her old sex partners, only to have one guy say to her, “Yeah. Yeah. I know.  I was the one who gave it to you!”

And what if he got it from someone else, but because you’re the only one who admits your condition to him, you get blamed for everything? In a population where everyone is in denial and nobody gets themselves tested (that’s how diseases are spread), the honest ones who outted themselves could get blamed for quite a lot.

Let’s look at a scenario where both partners are carrying something the other party knows nothing about (see table below). Notice that in three of the cases (both confess, one confesses while the other doesn’t, vice versa), no intercourse would happen (one or both parties will run away as fast as their legs could carry them).

However, in the fourth case, where both partners refuse to tell the other that they’re infected, intercourse will take place, as well as cross-infection. Awww, it’s like a little Secret Santa of Horror: he got her herpes and she got his chlamydia. Not exactly the stuff of fairy tales, or even a guilty pleasure of a B-rated romantic comedy.

Notice that the table below does not have the arrows like the one for the cop-suspect scenario. That’s because the arrow represents a shift in action for each players to gain more. E.g. From getting a heavy sentence by being loyal to getting a medium sentence through betrayal. But in the case of STDs as it’s set up right now, there’s no gain from telling, hence there are no arrows to push the players anywhere. The players start at the upper left corner, and stay there.

	Sex Partner #2 avoids talking about his/her STD	Sex Partner # 2 confesses about his/her STD
Sex Partner #1 avoids talking about his/her STD	Intercourse, Cross-Infection	No intercourse, No Cross-Infection.
Sex Partner # 1 confesses about his/her STD	No intercourse, No Cross-Infection.	No intercourse, No Cross Infection.

(continued in my next post...)