Professor Yaffle
Butterbeans and Breadcrumbs
I wondered why this thread was bumped, but I guess it should stay a mystery.
Skepticism and The Normal
- Thread starter WWHP
- Start date
Is BF/TM/Rome coming back? I could do with another $100
Hey Zoot! Old friend! It's been a long time, eh? Is this site still active? I see you are a staff member and administrator! I think you came to this forum originally back in the day because of this very discussion thread, if i am not mistaken. You are also the only person who knows that I honor my word, if I see that I make a mistake, I admit it, and even pay my debts
So, here we are in 2025, some 18 or so years since this remarkable conversation. Wow have things evolved since this conversation! You have no idea what an historical conversation this was and you will be shocked to learn about its evolution, especially its genuine contribution in game theory and computer science. It turns out there was something to this "ternary para consistent" logic
I of course was "Bubblefish" or "Bubb" as I was called often. And in 2007, this discussion thread was very much a "show", a type of performance that had a specific topic of conversation, at the time called OS 0 1 2
Since this discussion ended, I have had a long and very complicated relationship with "skeptics". When I arrived here, my true intentions were to understand OS 01 2 better, and the reason I put on a "show" because it was the only way I knew at the time to effect a certain pattern in conversation, and from following this pattern, I could make predictions about what would happen next in the conversation. This was at the time my own crude form of "peer review" for this special project.
OS 0 1 2 evolved massively since then, and is now known as "Conversational Game Theory". After this conversation in 2007, I shared it with Professor Jim Fallon from UCI, and I asked him what he thought, I felt I was on to something with game theory, psychology, and conversation, but wasn't sure if it was delusion or real.
He really took an interest in what I was doing, and spent quite some time with me dissecting every little thing. He told me that I was indeed on to something, even though I still had a lot of work to do. He became my mentor and science advisor, and ever since, he guided me and I think he was amused by my own "gonzo" style of research. (Jim passed away last year, and I really owe so much to him)
So, since 2008, I stopped doing the "Bubblefish" show and focused on being a new dad and building a new career for myself in media and technology, but I kept developing the concept of OS 0 1 2.
So I would love to start a new relationship with the skeptics. You all helped me evolve and make this project better.
Conversational Game Theory demonstrates a true dynamic Nash equilibrium. We have a prototype we engineered that uses a decision tree and computer interface to guide conversation through a type of game play as a mechanism design. Our company is still very early stage, we have not made any formal announcement yet, but we give demonstrations quite often.
It turns out that Conversational Game Theory, as a type of consensus building game, also works as quite a sophisticated reasoning layer that can be applied to LLMs.
I would love to show anyone here the system, and invite you if you are curious to see if you can "game the system" or hack it. Anyone curious please reach out to me on linked in https://www.linkedin.com/in/romeviharo/
we are just getting website up and running here https://symbiquity.ai
Anyway, this conversation thread is historic. It was the very last of the Bubblefish "shows" and successfully demonstrated everything I needed at the time to figure out how to build this thing, and 18 years later, finally have!
Big love to you all. You all helped make Conversational Game Theory a real thing!
Rome aka Bubblefish
Last edited: