From: John Brothers <johnbr@atl.mindspring.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 08:24:57 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Twenty Bank Robbers -- Game theory:)
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19960725212112.0069d924@pop.atl.mindspring.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 03:03 PM 7/25/96 -0400, you wrote:
>On Thu, 25 Jul 1996, jim bell wrote:
>> My guess?  They all agree to kill whoever made that suicidal rule.  
>> Otherwise, all but two would end up dead.
>But the people at the start of the line know that if they don't 
>hang together, they will end up dead, and if that they act purely 
>selfishly only the last two will benefit. Because they want to stay 
>alive, a better solution for the first person to propose equal shares, 
>which would be opposed by the last two players, but supported by the rest.
>He could also split the money only amongst the first half of 
>the gang, since he only needs half the votes.

doh!  I just spent 20 minutes writing all the logic to that down!

And to absolutely maximize his chances of staying alive, he will divide
the money amongst robbers #2 - #10, and give up his own share.  

At least, that is the proposal I would make were I under those circumstances.

John

---
John Brothers 
   Do you have a right not to be offended?