The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 24

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vixen said:
No, she didn't. She referred vaguely to a 'South African' guy*. When surely she knew his name.
*This would be Rudy's own self-reference for the purpose of the Rugby World Cup Final, which he claims he watched at the same pub as Mez (and she was there with her friends, and he with his) between England and South Africa. He claims he exchanged banter with Mez at the pub and again on Halloween, saying he quipped, 'Will you be sucking my blood' as a reference to her vampire makeup and England losing.
Click to expand...

Wow, you really are all consumed by your confirmation bias. Unbelievable.

And here's the idiocy of it all - how is Amanda covering for Guede by not giving his name when surely the boys downstairs will be giving up his name when they are asked. You see everything through guilt colored glasses, no matter how illogical or unsubstantiated it might be.
 
Vixen said:
No, she didn't. She referred vaguely to a 'South African' guy*. When surely she knew his name.
*This would be Rudy's own self-reference for the purpose of the Rugby World Cup Final, which he claims he watched at the same pub as Mez (and she was there with her friends, and he with his) between England and South Africa. He claims he exchanged banter with Mez at the pub and again on Halloween, saying he quipped, 'Will you be sucking my blood' as a reference to her vampire makeup and England losing.
Click to expand...

I can't remember the name of my neighbor and I've lived next to her for 20 years! Can you honestly tell me, Vixen, what the name of the person you were casually introduced to 2-3 weeks ago is? Give me a break.

No one, not a single person, including Meredith's friends and Guede's friends, backed his story. Can you deduce why that is?
 
Stacyhs said:
I can't remember the name of my neighbor and I've lived next to her for 20 years! Can you honestly tell me, Vixen, what the name of the person you were casually introduced to 2-3 weeks ago is? Give me a break.

No one, not a single person, including Meredith's friends and Guede's friends, backed his story. Can you deduce why that is?
Click to expand...

But Vixen knows Rudy so well.

Never mind that Rudy's adopted parents said Rudy was a compulsive liar and that all the judges said Rudy was not credible.
 
Vixen,
Could you elaborate on why you think this is an example of the Prisoner's dilemma? In the classic example of the Prisoner's dilemma, the Nash equilibrium is for them to betray each other. And yet you are arguing that Knox "covered up" for Rudy because of the Prisoner's dilemma. Someone she had no emotional connection to nor any reason whatsoever to help.

This has been explained to you before, and here you are trotting it out again.

I have noticed you like to say smart sounding things while simultaneously not ever really knowing what you're talking about. Why is that?
 
NotEvenWrong said:
Vixen,
Could you elaborate on why you think this is an example of the Prisoner's dilemma? In the classic example of the Prisoner's dilemma, the Nash equilibrium is for them to betray each other. And yet you are arguing that Knox "covered up" for Rudy because of the Prisoner's dilemma. Someone she had no emotional connection to nor any reason whatsoever to help.

This has been explained to you before, and here you are trotting it out again.

I have noticed you like to say smart sounding things while simultaneously not ever really knowing what you're talking about. Why is that?
Click to expand...

Thank you. That was the way I understood it. But I didn't want to get into specifics about that because it's game theory and it really doesn't address the myriad of reasons I think it's ridiculous that Knox enjoying her adventure of school abroad and living in Italy would suggest to 2 people to kill her roommate of just a month.

If Amanda had been this crazy person that couldn't deal with not being included (something I don't believe) there would be lots of stories in Seattle about Knox and there are none.
 
acbytesla said:
But Vixen knows Rudy so well.

Never mind that Rudy's adopted parents said Rudy was a compulsive liar and that all the judges said Rudy was not credible.
Click to expand...

I don't think Guede was ever formally adopted. The Caporalis were his foster parents.

Guede's foster sister, Iliana, also said that he was "like a baby who didn't know right from wrong".
 
acbytesla said:
Thank you. That was the way I understood it. But I didn't want to get into specifics about that because it's game theory and it really doesn't address the myriad of reasons I think it's ridiculous that Knox enjoying her adventure of school abroad and living in Italy would suggest to 2 people to kill her roommate of just a month.

If Amanda had been this crazy person that couldn't deal with not being included (something I don't believe) there would be lots of stories in Seattle about Knox and there are none.
Click to expand...

There you go again confusing the issue with logic!
 
Stacyhs said:
I don't think Guede was ever formally adopted. The Caporalis were his foster parents.

Guede's foster sister, Iliana, also said that he was "like a baby who didn't know right from wrong".
Click to expand...

Thanks for the correction. So many of the details that I knew so well are disappearing from my memory.
 
acbytesla said:
Thank you. That was the way I understood it. But I didn't want to get into specifics about that because it's game theory and it really doesn't address the myriad of reasons I think it's ridiculous that Knox enjoying her adventure of school abroad and living in Italy would suggest to 2 people to kill her roommate of just a month.
Click to expand...

Yeah totally agree.

And other than Vixen getting the conclusion ass backwards (Prisoner's dilemma shows that the rational choice is to betray, not cooperate, under the framework of game theory), it doesn't have anything to do with the actual "prisoner's dilemma" anyway.

The prisoner's dilemma is a game theory example with very specific criteria and a payoff matrix describing rewards for the different choices for Prisoner 1 and Prisoner 2. And it is used to show that even if the "best" overall outcome is for them to cooperate, under the conditions of the problem the rational, self-interested choice is to betray.

Since Amanda and Raffaele didn't construct a payoff matrix (lol) and rationally work through the potential outcomes and figure out the Nash equilibrium, it's got nothing at all to do with the actual prisoner's dilemma.

Vixen just goes "hurr durr this sounds smart and we have prisoners so let's say prisoner's dilemma and game theory in my post because iamverysmart". Just like she does with everything else.
 
Last edited:
NotEvenWrong said:
Vixen,
Could you elaborate on why you think this is an example of the Prisoner's dilemma? In the classic example of the Prisoner's dilemma, the Nash equilibrium is for them to betray each other. And yet you are arguing that Knox "covered up" for Rudy because of the Prisoner's dilemma. Someone she had no emotional connection to nor any reason whatsoever to help.

This has been explained to you before, and here you are trotting it out again.

I have noticed you like to say smart sounding things while simultaneously not ever really knowing what you're talking about. Why is that?
Click to expand...


No, the Nash Equilibrium predicts that a person will do what is rationally best for his- or herself. IOW they will only screw over their accomplices if they think there's an advantage for themself.

So we see Raff chomping at the bit to let police believe he was at home whilst <shrug> who knows where she was. Raff and Amanda saying it was Rudy alone (although, goodness knows how they know, unless they were there). Rudy making Raff sweat by his constant hints about what he will reveal next. He's lodged an appeal against the dismissal of his request for a review:- and, nota bene: it is based on what Florence Court (Martuscelli-Masi) had to say 10 Feb 2017 about Raff and Amanda. He's twigged that a piece of 'new evidence' is what is needed.

Raff, sweating like crazy, is now campaigning to have Rudy deported - who knows what 'strange things' Rudy will say about him

It's all an amusing side show; the three perps psyching each other out.

Thus, we had the fish blood on Raff's hand from Amanda.

Of the three, Raff is the coldest, and Rudy the cleverest and Amanda the most cunning.

Mignini spotted all of this.
 
Last edited:
acbytesla said:
Thank you. That was the way I understood it. But I didn't want to get into specifics about that because it's game theory and it really doesn't address the myriad of reasons I think it's ridiculous that Knox enjoying her adventure of school abroad and living in Italy would suggest to 2 people to kill her roommate of just a month.

If Amanda had been this crazy person that couldn't deal with not being included (something I don't believe) there would be lots of stories in Seattle about Knox and there are none.
Click to expand...

Jody Arias also comes as across as 'a very nice person', to the unwary. Who thought she could do what she did?
 
NotEvenWrong said:
Yeah totally agree.

And other than Vixen getting the conclusion ass backwards (Prisoner's dilemma shows that the rational choice is to betray, not cooperate, under the framework of game theory), it doesn't have anything to do with the actual "prisoner's dilemma" anyway.

The prisoner's dilemma is a game theory example with very specific criteria and a payoff matrix describing rewards for the different choices for Prisoner 1 and Prisoner 2. And it is used to show that even if the "best" overall outcome is for them to cooperate, under the conditions of the problem the rational, self-interested choice is to betray.

Since Amanda and Raffaele didn't construct a payoff matrix (lol) and rationally work through the potential outcomes and figure out the Nash equilibrium, it's got nothing at all to do with the actual prisoner's dilemma.

Vixen just goes "hurr durr this sounds smart and we have prisoners so let's say prisoner's dilemma and game theory in my post because iamverysmart". Just like she does with everything else.
Click to expand...


The problem is its not real life. It's a theory played totally outside what happens in the pressure environment of police interrogations. This is not something that can be reproduced in a test environment. You simply can't simulate the fear that has to be involved.
 
Vixen said:
No, the Nash Equilibrium predicts that a person will do what is rationally best for his- or herself. IOW they will only screw over their accomplices if they think there's an advantage for themself.
Click to expand...

That isn't the prisoner's dilemma and it isn't game theory. You are just saying "people are rationally self-interested".

Jesus H. Christ.

The Nash equilibrium is to betray in the prisoner's dilemma. Period. Full stop. Read a freakin' book once in awhile. It beats pretending you are an expert on everything on the internet.
 
Vixen said:
Jody Arias also comes as across as 'a very nice person', to the unwary. Who thought she could do what she did?
Click to expand...

False equivalence. Arias killed her ex-boyfriend not her roommate of a few weeks and she didn't have to persuade two people she barely knew to help and cover it up.
 
acbytesla said:
The problem is its not real life. It's a theory played totally outside what happens in the pressure environment of police interrogations. This is not something that can be reproduced in a test environment. You simply can't simulate the fear that has to be involved.
Click to expand...

Prisoners dilemma is just a variation of the Nash Equilibrium, and can be applied to virtually any situation where the assumption is:

(a) a person acts rationally
(b) they have control over their own decision, but
(c) no direct control over the other guy's decision.



Thus it is rational for Raff to claim he is 'not sure' if Amanda was with him on the murder night; Rudy that it was Raff; Amanda & Raff it was Rudy, Rudy is now 101% sure it was Amanda, etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom