I see whatchu did there

*pulls out shotgun*

“Sharing is Carr.. Copystrike.”

Where out of patience too

noice

Lmfaooo. So true.

Adam Dee Nigga what?

Adam Dee gtfo

Adam Dee Oh no, you triggered the Queen Tribe, I'd suggest running.

Adam Dee yeah basically their like u

İ think you didn't understand the video. With hawks, population increased more, so hawk is necessary evil

@@mertserimer6928 where exactly in the video did the introduction of hawks cause the population to increase?

Nash equilibrium part

@@mertserimer6928 really？I don’t find it, but I have the evidence that w bad guy messes up all shit 2:39

@@mertserimer6928 Are you sure about that? @2:35

You can learn more on game theory in microeconomics textbooks, you'll learn the basic definitions and how equilibriums work instead of starting off with multiple transactions like in the video. If you really want to hack at it, read the whole microeconomics textbook and you'll understand why in the real world there aren't any doves and they're all hawks lol.

@@jaimecastillo8716 you just spat extremely complicated words at idiots like us :)

Did you pay attention?

lol me 2

​​@@PotatoChips-jy9pk I hate this question

Black mirror.

the Other blob it's sharper

Draiden Don’t wanna be that person, but I’m 100th like

@@huskayaken8252 your the 100th person to like my comment. I'm gonna fly you down to Florida and interview for a talk show im hosting. Your not gonna gonna what it's called wanna be in it!?

Lol

that decreases their death chance from 50% to 5%, unless they are red, than it increases their death chance by 10%

You'll be surprised at how many papers talk about GAME THEORY and TAXES. 10000+ for sure

@@harmhoeks5996 Well anything that talks about human interaction are usually explained using game theory because that is how we think. They teach game theory in Politics as Basics of all political interactions :) The governments' job should be to educate people that they should act as a blue blob and the government will act as a blue blob and then you get maximum return. That is why Danish people are happy, as they get the maximum from their taxes as the corruption is really low :)

This guy is going to end up simulating the entire universe

5% go to prison for tax evasion

Same bro

same

But that's wrong and wrong again to feel OK about being unreasonable. Dove life experience and hawk life experience are both different AND involve the survival traits and features survival dictated had to be there OR else there'd be no one else to know, tell or consider the differences. As such, doves gotta do what doves do to be functional, SO occasional hawk food is naturally included, but you ignore and deplore THAT necessary part of dove existence. Essentially such misjudgment is due to idiosyncratic, psychopathological GREED; you want it all and no one gets nor deserves to get it all, no matter what, when, why, how where you are. Do you understand? CAN you ever understand OR is it beyond your capability to do so because you're so misfocused by BS data? I'm asking, not telling, for both our benefit.

But being a "dove" sux, so maybe such a condition is more of a good thing, overall, even for the hapless, barely conscious dove. If you had a choice, which would you be? Life quality seems to be entirely MISSING in all these considerations. Maybe doves will go extinct and something worth the life-struggle MIGHT emerge. But we'll never know with exponential dove repro rates and hawks sick of an exclusive diet of dovemeat, the conditions today, if you follow the analogy. We're drowning in doves, and veggie hawks are starving, so to speak, imho. Thomas Malthus, the British economist discovered the Malthusian Doctrine in the early 19th century. Show what unlimited population growth of any and all lifeforms in a closed system of limited resources results in - invariably as solid mathematics - social/environmental/biological collapse and mass die off.

@@jeffwalther3935 jeez calm down

Swans are way tougher than the other birds, steer clear of them when kayaking.

That is a really good idea

​@@TentacleseRexjust smack it with your paddle

What about when Raven and Swan Interact with each other?

You can also add a fifth, a grey one called the Seagull that just steals food from everyone cause seagulls are _assholes_

thats what I didn't get didn't he say if they only get a half they can't reproduce how can the only dove in a stack of hawks possibly reproduce then edit: aight so the moment he explained the purple blobs it seems to be apparent that you somehow have a chance of reproducing even if you went home with only 1/2 food would've been nice if he explained that more clearly at the start

@@JuliusBriggs, or he just could have gotten lucly and not met a hawk that round.

Banana Narwhals oh right cheers that makes sense

JMacCookie 100% Fruchtfleisch he explained it pretty clearly 😂

Ranora I just forgot that they can also encounter no one but I thought there’d be enough blobs so that everyone in the group would meet someone else Banana narwhals already reminded me of it

MINE MINE MINE, MINE MINE? MINE

Owl:eats the other blobs

MINEMINEMINEMINEMINEMINEMINEMINEMINEMINEMINEMINEMINEMINEMINEMINEMINEMINE

Apparently, there are seagulls in our world...

Mine mine mine minemine

The red and black game is well investigated and well documented for both human behavior and corporate strategies I'm pretty sure.

in prisoner's dilemma the two players are unable to communicate but in red and black game they can negotiate and deceive.

We played it in Psych. The teacher made a terrible mistake by announcing no one would play dove. So naturally we all doved lol

Los Humanos hacemos eso... por eso está sobrepoblado el planeta... pensar que los humanos somos egoístas solo proyecta tu perspectiva del la humanidad... es decir lo que para ti es normal, representa lo que tu normalmente harías... por cierto llevamos mucho sobreviviendo compartiendo... saludos.

You speak of "humans" as if we are all the same, and that's false... narcissists borderlines histrionics sociopaths/psychopaths/malignant narcissists (same-species predators) paranoids Those are 5 groups of people who have a broken moral compass...a disorder of MORAL character. Clinically, they're called personality disorders (psychology) or characterological disorders (psychiatry/medicine), and they don't play by the rules. In fact, they believe the rules and laws of society and the social contract apply to everyone else BUT them. They're the people who are most likely to completely derail your life (or career, if it's at work) and leave you with PTSD that changes you forever. In some cases, they may kill you. You see, not everyone is driven by the same "reward" as you suggest they are. For some people...read: sociopaths...their reward is just to f*ck other people's lives up so they can steal their joy...even if it kills them in the process. They don't care about themselves, so they sure don't care about others. Someone with paranoid personality disorder may kill you, even if you are their child, even if you are helping them survive. For narcissists, the only true reward they need is narcissistic supply (read: admiration from others). Even if you help them survive, if you become more publicly admired than them, they'll knife you in the back so quickly. In the most extreme form...malignant narcissism...they'll become suicide bombers for their cause if it will get them the "public admiration" they need. Psychopaths are almost entirely driven by greed...they never have enough toys, money, or shiny pretty objects to alleviate their extreme greed and extreme boredom...their god complex makes them believe they deserve it. The above are all different forms of sociopathy...what distinguishes one from the others is what DRIVES them to behave like a sociopath...and they KNOW they are very different from other people (doves) who have *empathy* for others. Many, many good, decent people don't even know these various forms of sociopathy exist. They see the horrific things that happen on the news, but they believe it's people who are "mentally ill" instead of recognizing these individuals are almost entirely morally bankrupt and predatory on those they perceive as weaker: even their own infants, toddlers, children, the ill, and the elderly. Some people automatically blame drugs and alcohol, not understanding that most all people who abuse drugs and alcohol have underlying Cluster B character disorders (narcissists, borderlines, sociopaths) and psychopaths use drugs and alcohol to alleviate their extreme and pervasive boredom and rarely, if ever, become addicted. Oh, and just to be clear. The term "hawk" means predator...and the term "dove" is a synonym for prey, just like in the real world, hawks are predatory birds who prey on the gentle nature of doves (and pigeons, fish, rodents). This YTer is using the terms hawk and dove, I can only assume because "predator" and "prey" is too haltingly honest and may be off-putting to some who don't understand how predators (narcissists, borderlines, histrionics, sociopaths/psychopaths see the people around them/in the world).

it's a better move But cruel

copied Yes I know im in youtube right now ok

lol

@@slellyman.6700 not cruel, if everyone shared we wouldn’t have anything to take but if everyone takes we wouldn’t have anything to share. We need competitive Hawk like people and we also cooperative Dove like people. People think of the color red as bad but to me it’s the color of competition not hurting people just trying to be better.

Nice

Only the Aviatar, master of all four blobs, could stop them, but when the world needed him most, he vanished

Food, more food, hawks, and pigeons

Cool, i get the reference.

Damnit I always skipped the recap

1000 th likes

Damn copied

@@chrissizemore1772 who cares lol

@@chrissizemore1772 Who says its copied? There is a similar comment but its not the same as others it could be inspired by the comment you think its copied from but it's not it's just used for inspiration. Sorry but I hate it when people say a comment is copied while really, it only has some similarities cause let me remind you 13 thousand people commented so far and you think all of those comments are different? once again sorry but it just annoys me so much to see people do this stuff and then again there is a chance this is copied but then changed a bit still that does not mean its copied, it's inspired by.

more like hipity hopity your food is now my property

So fucking cringe

Me:yes but actually no

Hawk when it meets other hawk: THIS IS NOT OKIE DOKIE

Goose to the hawk peace was never an option is my thing hawk I have teeth on Tongue on my beak I can destroy your life hawk

shouldsuckmydick DonaldTrump lol I understood the reference! Yeh pretty much, can mutants and normal people live in peace together 😂

Doves: "Sharing is caring" Hawks: *but I don't care*

Hehehe lol true

союз нерушимый республик свободных

Communism

SpiderEye_Golum *soviet noises*

*Yep*

Yea true lol

Lol

this comment in a nutshell, half the time olives are to die for. literally.

@@Harper180 Lmao ye

Bruh, I thought those were grapes, lol.

School cafeteria logic

Yes

The blue ones are called doves and the red ones are called hawks

@@TheTaqiadeen we know mr smart guy

@@TheTaqiadeen هاي صعب تحصل سعودي

@Amethyst Girl dove noises

@CraZy Jeez didn't you know that the gays can multiply. Noob

@CraZy Sharing is only gay when it's done out of, like, authentic human empathy and compassion for others. I mean... if a man shares his lunch with a homeless man because he actually just enjoys making people happier for some reason (and they both have male genitalia), then that's obviously pretty gay. Like, dude... You're being nice to another man. Lol. Wtf. Yeah... That's gay af. But you have to also consider that sharing is basically communism, and communism is what allowed a poor farming country to grow into a global superpower with a dominating military and advanced nuclear/space technology in a matter of like 20 years, continuing to mess with global politics even several decades after its collapse. So, if the immense power contained within the dark art of "sharing" is handled by a real, dominating man, then it's clearly not gay at all. In that case, it's actually world domination, pretty much.

Sharing is caring! Hawk: sounds like communism!

jerimy williamson in the meantime, they’re red themselves

@@silent_stalker3687 They're definitely blinking. Look at the blue blob at the beginning of the video. It blinks a couple of times.

@@silent_stalker3687 uh, no. They're blinking.

Lmao, this silent stalker guy deleted his comment. Maybe he realised how stupid he was being

@Eliscpsis • precisely what he said. Like how dumb can one be tf 😂

Eliscpsis • _the cursor_

Ikr

Indeed

What does he use to make these simulations?

itskatea The 2024 people will be here soon don’t worry

Bro this video has a 2013 UKposts vibe tho, It's like the video where they turn the sphere inside out

Yes

Yes

2:35am for me...

Its 2:09 for me and I said "why not"

Bout to be 4 😛

*kills jerry and takes all the food*

@@gavrochethenardier957-Damn it hawk!

1.5 / 0.5?

@@ManicMercurianAstrology nah..2.5/7.5

Sorry to be that guy this reply section is jokes

what if you dont know what is opponent

ikr

Yes, there is!

It’s kind of strange…

Ikr?

Honesty

Parent: *E A T T H E B A B Y*

Underrated comment

I can hear Albert screaaming Die in my ear

Rohan H oof XD

Oof XD

Everybody gangsta till you tell them that all they had to do was follow the damn train.

Choc Chip "CJ!"

Come on, it's not hard math. Well, depends how old you are and what grade you go in.

Everybody gangsta till you have to understand basic fractions

Oh god oh fuck he's talking about decimals now I take it back

Ibrahim Barham HAHA OMG

HAHA THAT'S SO FUNNY AND LITERALLY WHAT'S HAPPENING HAHA

Only retards thank people for likes B̶̨̧̨̢̧̧̢̡̧̧̢̢̢̢̨̡̨̢̧̨̡̢̡̢̧̡̛̛̛̮̖͈̲͚͉͚͔̘̞͍͍̼̱̪̦͔̻͕͉̳̜̖̞̮̳̻͇̦̩͉̗͇̺̼͔̣͓̬͓̞̟̭͓̘̥̲̬͈̼̩̥͉̱͚̝̠͓̩͕̤̼͙͈̫̘͙͚̬̪͖̘̲̻̪̘͉̼̗̳̤̹̙̟̮̘̬͓̰̲̩͙̝̹̮̙̖̮̰̙̬̮̮͖̭̗̘͉̦̭̼͖̝̠͇̝̬̫̦̘͍̭̱͇͚̗͚͕͈̠͎̫̪͔͉̬̰̫̰̘̱͓̟̞̤̩͇̠͉̤͉̹͔̤̻͈͇͈͕͚͔̮̳̜̞̭̖̪͎̘̠̙̦̬̣̫͚̙͓̹̪̟̗̜̝͇͖̠͔͍̖͓̼͙̦̜̟̖̩̞̹̱̰̖̩͎͍̗͕̱͔̘̻͔̥̲̠̭͔̱̜̝̣͖̱̈́̾̅̏̒̈́̈́̇͗͛̔̍̋̇̄̔͋̒̌̒̉̍̀̀̔̊͊́͂̊̔̈́̈́͆̑͐͛̄̎̊͗̈̎̓̏͛̈̽̎̍͛̈́͛̿̇͊̔͗͊̐̓͆͑̓͐͋̄̊̊̀̽́͛́͆͊͊̂̀̆̀̂̽̊̽̾̐̌̓̀̄̚̕̚͘͜͜͜͜͝͝͠͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅ ̴̨̧̨̨̡̡̨̛̛̛̛̛̛͍̪̪͎̗̮͈̻̩̟̰̲̭̬̜͕̩͚͕̯̳͔̬̺̹̻̳̯̘͎̹̦͍̗̦̲̘̥͙̩̝̠̼̻̯̖̭͍͙͖͓̺͉̫̙̭̰̤̟̖̱̭͕̻͚̰̬̮̯͍̭̳̗͓̹͎̳̘̙̗̤̩̜̜̳̬͙̮̞̻̖̉͗̓̏͛͌̊̓̑̄̓̎́̈́͊̍͑̓̃͆́̓͆͒͂̊̂͌͊̊͂̈́̐̆͛͗̉͐̒̎͌͑͆̒̀̽̇͒̎̎̋̓̓̀̓̋̒̐͑͛̆͒̏̎͌̾̓̾̎͂̆̃̉̅̑̑͒̽͋͂̄̓͐̏̈́̋́̅̍̓̏̋̓̈́͒͌̇́̓͌̀̏͐̀͊̄̔̌͛̏͛̈́̅̔̃͌́̀̎͐̏̇̓̋̅̈́̆̌̿͊̌̿̿̓̉͂̔̅̃͆͌̀̋̓͌̌͌͂͛̌̋́̏̔͛̏̈́̇̾̽̀͛̉̎̓̈́̀̎̂͆̍̉́̉̑̈́͋̀̌͂̽̃̋͑̃̾͗́͋͛̔̋̀̍͗̍̀̀͂̔̂̑͂͋̋͆̐̈́̀̈́̎̐̑̔̊̆̎̆͑̀̍̀̉̈̉̔͂̕̚͘͘͘̕̚͘̕̚͜͜͜͜͝͝͝͝͝͝͠͝͠͝͠͝͝͠ͅŗ̵̛̛̛͕̣̙̠͚̳͕̱̖̫͈͈̫̲͚̭̭̻͈̝͓̙̥̼̻̺̜̜̣̩̜̘̗̺̻̪̤̜̍̌̅̐̐̓̏̂̂̇́͐̿̂͐͊͂̒̔͑̃͒̎̂̊̏́̒̃̓̿͋̌́̾̄́̂̑̏̂͐͑͑́̓̐̑͑̌̈́̒̀̉̓̀̏̃̀̓͑̊̋̊̐̄́͛̉͐̄̈̔̾͗̓̅̐͋̓̇̈́̀̊́̔̋͋̌̅̾̃̐̇̌͋̎̾̆̈̓̃͌̈́̃̐͋̊̈͒̇͒́͊̈̂̒̆̎͑̈́̐̀̂͒̿̑̕͘̚̕̚̕̚̚̕̕̚͜͝͠͝͝͝͝͠͝ͅͅ ̶̨̡̧̡̡̨̧̧̨̧̨̨̨̧̨̧̢̢̡̡̢̨̢̨̢̡̛̛̛̛̛̛̛̛̩͎̝͙̘̞̞̱̞͓̮̝̱̫͍̜̭͖͈̞̳̣̳̦̣̖̟̮̟͈̭̩͙̖̦͔̘̰̲̪̮̞̣̩͔̼̻̘̮̰͙̦̱̭̙̯̱̭̮͈̰̟̳̼̯̭̗͉̲̼̹̰̪̮̳͙̪̥͈͇̟̙̜̮͖͔͎̺̜͉̩͕̬͇̪̦̩͕̱̲̺͕͇̱̼̣̮̣̮̟̖̩̲̫̖͕̖̳̦͍̱̯̙͉̺̳͍͓͎͕̪̼̖̞͉͉̘͙͔͉̳͉̤͇̝͕̞͖̲̰̪̰͙̦̫̻͎̩̼̱̺̳̹͖̮̺̝̬͙̮̜͚̙͙̤̺̗̘͔̺̞͉̰̙̞̦̦̘͙͓̱͎̖̘͙̱̯̝̥̟̞̭̤͓̱̳͚͇͇̰̲̤̩̹̯̪͖̼̤͔͈̜͕͈̤̗̭͇̹͚̂͆̂̈̅̎̇̋̿̄̾̇̊̌͗͌̓̍̂͑̇̐̿̿͌̀̄́̆͒͋̔͐̑̈́̓̊̉͒̃̑̀͂̏̇́̒̂́̅͗̄̈́̿́͌̍́̿̾̿͂́̄͌͑͌̇͑͒͛͑̈̄̈̑̀̔̓̎̽̐̓̌͋̀̿̍̔͒̐̅̊̀̾̎̇͑̀̐̌̈́͛̈͂͑̌͛͐͌͗͊̔̈́̾̏̍̎͊͒̉̂̊̉̇̂̅̄̏̀̈͐͂̾́͂͑̎͂͆̾̐̍̌̍̂̏͋̃͊̾̒͛̽͗͂͋̓͑̽̑͂̈́̿̒̅̊́͆͂̂̾͌͐̅̃̑̅̋̋̍͌͗̐̃̌̽̀̏̔͊̾͑̒̅̀́̀̋͋̿͊̅̈́̅̆̏̆̾̃̔̔͋̈́̑͋̂͆͋̅̊̑̂͌̋̿́̒̈̃̌̍͛̓͋̇̉͘̚͘̚͘̚͘̕͘̚͘͘͘͘͘̕̕̕̚͘̕͜͜͜͠͝͝͝͝͠͠͝͠͝͠͠͝͠͝͝ͅͅͅͅủ̶̧̡̡̨̨̢̧̨̨̨̨̨̢̢̧̢̢̢̨̢̧̪͎̲̱̲͎̹͚̫̱̣͓͉̟̝͙̜͚̟͕͓̣̫͎̜̥̖̘̜̳̩͓̪̭͙̘̳̥͓͎̯̺̼̗̭̪̘̠̹̰̲̜̰͙͓̝̳̠̙̰͎̝̩̳̯̺͈̤̟̙̳̰̥̣̠̘̮̙̩̝̫̮͚̥̗͚͇͙̥͉̖͚̮̲̟̲̺̗͍̩̗̪͇͓̣͙͍͕͖̦̘͙̦͕̝͚͕̱̮͖͕̞͎̬͍̪̞̹͎̦̪̯͕̗̼̠̘͈̱̠̻͔̖͙̬͔̤͇͔̳͚͚͓͉̮̲̮̰͚̠̼̻͔̠̜̮̫̭̣̱̖̬͍͎͇̦͈̹͇͍̱̼̰̪̝͙̗̭̉̿͌̆͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͝ͅͅͅͅͅͅͅͅͅͅ ̶̧̡̢̡̧̨̧̡̡̧̨̢̧̢̢̢̨̧̨̧̡̢̡̧̡̡̨̡̨̢̢̢̡̢͇͎̟̟̟̜͖̞͇̻̹͕̻͉̺̦̣̣̭̟̲̫͔̘̮̙̘͖͚̘̖̜͓̬̬͙̺̜̦̙͓̠̖̲̖̝͖̜̘̝͙̠̝̜̖̲̤̦̦̗̮͙̩̬̫͕̜̞̼̥̳̼̤͉̹̬͈͖̯̖̮̠͙͚̘̼̝̭̫̤͕̳̹̼̞̭͎̜͈̹̫̙̻̼̤̱͍̞͎̣̝͎͕̮͓͚̬͕̳̻̠͉͕̣͉̩̙̳̳̠͚͚͙͕̭͚̬̟̦̙̯͙̱̙̼̰͚̘͔̮̝̯̮͓͙͉͎̞͎̬̜̬̰̣̬̰̥̥̤̼̖̗͙͉̹̜̗̲̮̯̗̭͎͈̹̻͍͈̻̯̳͉̗͉̯͚͚̙̻̠̬͖̲͚̥̺̺͈̜͕̥̙͍͙̦͕͔͙͎̫̞̥̲̫͎͓̹̘͖͚͙͖̲̘͚̪̤̘̟̮̭̲̘̫̰̬̥̠̥͍̌͆̉̐̏̀̌̔͒̂̔͌̆͑̄̀̈́̌͋̓̀͋̒͂̆̊̈́̄̋̈́͘͜͜͜͝͠ͅͅḫ̵̨̨̡̧̢̧̡̢̡̧̢̨̢̧̨̨̛̬͔̻̘̙̥̖̯̲̘͙̜̥̥̠͍̪̫̰̦̠̞̣̗̣͕͖̥̫̯͈̠̫͙̱͚̫̺͎̟̬͓̱̳͉̮̙͕̞͙͚̟̪̱͉̪̞̱̘̤̪͍͚̙̠̳̲̖̫̝̗̘̬̯̻̬̱̩͉̭͓̼͙̰͇̟͔͔̠̘͍̙̗͍̞͔͍̲͉̪͖̮͚͇̭͉̝̥̳̝͇̝̫͙̦̰̜̙̲̣̘̠͖͈̙̻͕̺̳̦̳͔͓̬̪̭̦̬̖̥͔̤̺̳͇̞̲̦̭̭͖͔̭̖̩̭̟̹͓̲̹̫̱̰̳͇͚̗̝̬̲͇̥͔͒̃͛̅̍͌͊̆̏̀̾̊̋̔̓́̅̓͑̋̈̈́̉̀̀͌͌̎̈́̇̍̔̌͂͗̇̑̽̄̏́͐̃̏͊̈̿̇͂̀̈̇̃̀̏͐́̉͂͊̃̈̀͊́́̂̉̿̅̌̒̋̌̿͒͋͛̈̏̅̓͆͌̔̂̾͒͛͒́͒́͗̊͊̌̈̓̆͐̇̀̉̃͌̎̀͐̓̾̇̈̓̎͑̍̔͊͊̈̃̐̓́̀̓̃̒̈̒͆̅́̓̅̅̆̿̔͛͊͗͑̀̒͘̚̕͘͘̕͘͘̚̕̚̕̕͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͠͝͝͝͝͝͝͝͝͠͝ͅͅͅͅͅͅ

@@frozencascade HAHA I DON'T GET IT AND ITS NOT FUNNY IF YOU HAVE TO EXPLAIN IT HAHA

HAHAHAHAHA

Well this isn't really math. I think its kind of a science lesson. I mean the people being aggressive and nice isn't really math or English but it could be considered as science but thats just how I see it not how you do. Its okay to have opinions!

@@littleherbling3721 that is true

@TriVos Ahren I completely forgot about biology lol sorry.

sociology

hate that sht

I understood that reference

@@sho6413 Tombstone, right?

@@giphe Megamind

@@sho6413 oh

@@sho6413 Nah, clearly Invincible

I'm sorry, you'll need to wait until next black Friday.

@@TheIntJuggler lmaooo

Where did he go for real tho?

@@briansandoval316 I don't know

What does he use to make these simulations?

Hawk is my sis, Dove is me :')

same T^T

@@vagabonder02 same

It’s fun being a hawk

*soviet anthem intensifies *

underated comment

Let's try to shift that, fellow dove brethren!!

Thats actually the reason why there are less wars nowadays then in the past fighting just isnt worth it anymore

The good news is that human history has trended towards greater equality, more cooperation, and less conflict over time. Probably, that fact doesn't reflect a change in the overall human genome though. It's something very different that genetics cannot entirely explain by itself. You have to actually conceptualize it, because evolution is much bigger than genetics. In terms of genetics, we are barely any different now than we were 10,000 years ago, when civilizations began to emerge all around the world, and there was nonstop fighting. The reason that humans all began to settle down at the same time was, probably, because the climate was changing, given that it was right around the end of the last ice age. Humans had to adapt to the same global event at the same time. As it happened, we all chose the same solution. We were already a prosocial species who could think ahead and plan for the future, so the easiest solution to scarcity due to mass extinction was literally just grouping together, sharing, and cooperating to make life mutually better for everyone. Everyone can contribute to what needs to be done, and at the end of the day, everyone actually has more energy to do more things as a result. You don't have to work nearly as hard if you have help. It's pretty obvious when you think about it. It is beneficial for you to get help, and in order to get help, you have to do something to help someone else too. You have to cooperate and share, but in return, you are also more likely to survive. Ever since we settled down into fixed societies and abandoned the ways of our nomadic, hunter-gatherer ancestors, we have begun to evolve culturally, as well as biologically. We became reliant on others for our own survival, and as a result, it became a selective pressure to conform to the norms of the group. If you contribute more to the group, then the group will favor you, and you will be taken care of. It is thus beneficial for your own survival to contribute to the group's survival. On the other hand, if you try to cheat the group and only take for yourself without ever giving back, then you will be shunned, cast out, or possibly even executed by your peers (depending on the severity of your crimes). Selfishness is thus selected against. Empathy is an advantage in close-knit society where everyone helps everyone, but not in a culture where people are distant and pessimistic about the motivations of others. In that case, selfish behavior would be more advantageous to you, because it is not certain that your cooperation will be reciprocated by someone else in the group. You might be expending energy working for the sole benefit of someone else, but then not receiving the same altruism in return. So, you are actually worse off for contributing to society, and it might be preferable to build a shack in the woods and live by yourself. Simply put, modern society *is* the prisoner's dilemma. Cooperation is preferable, but no one trusts anyone else, so they don't want to risk contributing to the group without receiving anything back from the group.

Can you all just... BEHAVE YOURSELVES

It could very well have it was quite lucky

It would have had a 1/4 chance of dying the first round but I agreed wit you ngl

I don’t understand. Where did that one dove get the reproduction possibility? If he only met with hawks, he could only have 50% chance of living, but no reproduction chance.

Bass Weapon facts

@@bassweapon if he landed on 2 uncontested green blobs. In this model if you get 2 green blobs u reproduce not if you meet another mate.

spheres*

peas

Shrek's ass*

Matthew Farrell i don't even know anymore!

Idk

Brilliant

Thought the same bro

Never related so hard

I truly paused the video and did the math...

@@diesechl4415 and I was truly high

Lo l

"if it's just 50% of ME dying.. then why not increase it for both of us?"

Think of the other way, if your gonna act like hawk against hawk, you will just have a survival rate of 0%.

@@nayankumarbarwa4317 and?

Lel

Ah yes I understand this complicated math

@@gary1471 the algorithmic theory of how it all works 😂

@@hayden6265 hmm I agree yes this algorithm is so easy to understand

You're slow

@@EngineerMikey5 you’re fast

XD

😁

and also 50% that you are one yourself :P

LMAO

What if I’m the asshole?

Same here

The UKposts algorithm is confusing sometimes

Bitboxtunes same here buddy

Bitboxtunes same

advertisement - paid recommendation

😂😂😂😂😂

This sounds familiar... (Deku and Bakugou)

@@Kai-fe4kd Yesn't. I got u, bnha is awesome, but it's more of a Brie Larson reference.

@@procrastinatorqueen imagine calling memes references

Any pvp game in a nutshell

Он, кстати русский

правда, они в 1 момент обрываются

@@techexplorer7484 пруфы

@@prosto_ludyna акцент русский

@@techexplorer7484 Это не значит что он русский. Он может быть, например, сербом. Врятле можна различить сербский и русский акценты.

Why is this so true XD

I feel ya

same

Same!

This isn't math

sad dove noises

@Tin Nguyen They’re * and who cares

*G R A P E*

@Tin Nguyen and you dont know that

@@puggumpus yes

YEEAAAAA

@@maleryisdead who did say that?

@@techexplorer7484 wgat'

Lmao

Lmao

Lmao

Lmao

Lmao

Hahahahaha

My siblings is like a hawks

The avatar makes it even more funny😂😂

Extreme Demon

lmao

That we know of in this contained situation, but imagine if the hawks are necessary to keep away a predator that would have wiped away their entire species?

@@GoIdenbaum Well it would likely not be a predator that wipes out a whole species. The predator and the prey stay in a pretty close population size. Predators depend on the prey thus making their population decline as the prey decline allowing the prey to increase and restart the cycle. A dangerous variable can be an invasive species. In this case, a hawk would serve a purpose in combatting the invasive species and may have a better survival chance rate as played into natural selection.

LordLukste it was an avatar joke

@@hispanicbaljeet4076 Getting the heck out of there tends to be the superior evolutionary strategy for prey when facing their predators. It's lonely at the apex. Sometimes you forget that when you are human...and American...

Everybody gangsta until the hawk steals your food

Boo Bella I love it

Joypad gaming 3rd comment(I know...)

Yup Literally 😂😂😂

Whuut,??

Really he did?

Not meant for babies

Riz Rishi Sahu my comment wasnt meant for people who dont know sarcasm

@@thatkoreankid3663 so out of 7400000 people 37 are sarcasm experts like u... Congratulations

Riz Rishi Sahu if u really think ur that smart you should put into consideration, how many people actually like comments, how many people actually saw my comment, and how many people saw the video after i had posted the comment lol. idk if you noticed but out of all the people who saw the comment, at least 37, they at least understood the sarcasm lol. congrats 😂

Riz Rishi Sahu u really didnt understand 😂 it was so stupid i thought u were also being sarcastic

Hijacking to say - Nash equilibrium does not exist in the payoff matrix proposed. Nash would be if at least one of the players had a dominant strategy, resulting in the optimal square always being the same. In this example, no dominant strategy exists, because both players want to react to the opposite player.

And the animations

Me too

@@ultearmilkojohn1145 12:02

Me two!

Perhaps a bit too deep

Be the dove bro, be the dove

It's also about chances, but yes

Exactly. That's the point I dont understand.when they meet hawk they get 1/4th of food. And how can they survive before they even start to reproduce. I mean did they escape so many times from hawk ? Or is it one of the multiple scenarios/universe we are talking about. If that's the case I can understand, but otherwise that should be one lucky dove.

@@ursyedis The population was kinda low with hawks only so the chance of getting to food alone were really good as this was also the only way hawks could survive, because for hawks only, they either reproduce or die, but they never "just survive" The dove most likely didn't have to survive more than once (if at all) to get to reproduce and from that moment on it became easier and easier. But yes, if the dove had been unlucky, it would have died on the first day and it would have been over for the doves. But like one of the past videos said, many things on evolution depend on chances. Obviously to prove a point the shown simulation was not taken from one of the unlucky dove versions.

And even if you survive it's useless. In my country they've made quite stupid movie, part of serie. It was about guy being left by fiance because she preferred wealthier guy. So what her ex did? Found another girl? Nope. He sold all his stuff to get money and asked friend for help to pretend he won lottery or sth and is even more wealthy to stop her wedding, get her back and than, revealed that he's poor as hell ad left her. It was typical revenge. Guy just lost everything.Time, money, furniture... to make little, useless prank on his ex. Revenge is waste of time and sources.

Relevance?

Nemo TheEight If you’re alone you cant depend on others to make you happy, you must create that source of happiness.

In other words... make sure its fucking worth dieing over.

Confucious is also a dyed-in-the-wool conformist that looks at a poor person and is like "Well, better luck next time".

@national socialiser Peaceful does not mean weak.

@national socialiser many animals are polyamorous, some eat their mates, others will kill their children if they start to compete with them for leadership of the group, and very few animals grieve for dead family or mates if they were monogamous. In many ways humans are much more kinder than animals, only we perceive ourselves as worse because we have a better understanding of right and wrong then animals do - but we only have that "understanding" because of our peaceful nature in the first place. "Right" and "wrong" is a human concept. Animals just do what is best for them. Humans have this concept so that we can get along - our entire nature is a desire to fit in and be loved and get along because that is the survival strategy humans chose many many many eras ago. We want to a belong to a community and we are willing to die for that community so that the group may live on - this is why humans are described as social beings.

@national socialiser yes, that's what I said, I was replying to your statement that animals don't betray their families and are more accepting than humans among other things that were listed to portray animals as more "righteous" than humans. These actions are not "righteous" whether these actions were based on feelings or not.

Humans are animals... 😂

@national socialiser Yes I know this, it is true, but we are still just a species amongst other animals.

Well, you could calculate the chances of the dove dying (or surviving) the first day: If it meets a hawk, there's a 50% chance of it surviving. If it doesn meet a hawk, theres a 100% chance of survival and reproducing Now you have to add the chances of both situations happening. Lets say there are 10 pairs of food, 9 hawks and 1 dove. and we'll assume everyone finds a pair of food. All hawks have a 10% (1 of the 10 pairs of food has the dove) chance of going to the pair of food with the dove, 9 * 10% = 90%. So theres a 10% chance the dove doesnt meet a hawk. 10% * 100% + 90% * 50% = 55% chance of survival. And now without fixed numbers, but just some variables: (gonna use numbers instead of percentages here) survival = (1 - [#hawks] * 1 / [#food pairs]) * 1 + ([#hawks] * 1 / [#food pairs]) * .5 (if anyone finds any mistakes in my calculations, please lemme know) _What am I doing with my life, its 00:30am, I should go to bed instead of watching random math videos_ Edit: I forgot to include the fact that there cant be more than two creatures at one pair of food, which does influence the calculations a little. i.e., 10 food pairs, 19 hawks, 1 dove. theres a 100% chance that the dove will meet a hawk, because there are 20 spots where creatures can sit, which will all be taken, so there would be a 50% chance of survival. But with the formula I created it would be a 5% chance of survival, because according to the formula, there can be more than two creatures at one pair of food. I'll try to include that in the formula tomorrow...

Alright, new day, new math I think I got the right formula now h = number of hawks f = number of food pairs d = chance of dying when meeting a hawk survival = 1 - h / (2f-1) * d example: h = 3 f = 8 d = .5 survival = 1 - h / (2f-1) * d = 1 - 3 / (2*8-1) * .5 = 1 - 3 / 15 * .5 = 1 - .2 * .5 = 1 - .1 = .9 = 90% if anyone finds a mistake in my math, please lemme know

@@amber3650 Your 2f-1 term doesn't really make any sense to me. Perhaps there is some reasoning behind it that isn't totally off, but I calculated the answer and got a slightly different answer. Here's the idea: Let's called p the probability that you meet a hawk. The chance of survival is 100% if you don't meet a hawk and 50% if you meet a hawk, or 1*(1-p)+.5*p. Let's try to calculate p. Let's say there are f food pairs and h hawks (to keep consistent with your notation). Your food pair is fixed. There are (f choose h) ways to organize all the hawks, and (f-1 choose h) ways to organize all the hawks so that they aren't on your food pair. Thus, the chance that you don't meet a hawk is (f-1 choose h)/(f choose h), which if you do the algebra simplifies out to be (f-h)/f. This then means that the chance of meeting a hawk is h/f, or in your example 3/8. So our total survival probability comes out to be (f-h)/f+.5*h/f=(2f-h)/2f, or 13/16=81.25% in your example More generally, if your survival rate when meeting a hawk is s, then the probability of surviving the first day is (f+(s-1)h)/f. Let me know if you have any questions. EDIT: I goofed, correct formula should (hopefully) be below in my next comment.

@@amankarunakaran6346 Did you include the fact that there can only be zero, one or two creatures at one pair of food? I tested your formula with the example 19h, 10f, 1d, and survival chance at meeting of 0.5. The answer should be 0.5, because the dove will always meet a hawk, because there are 19 places where hawks can sit, and there are 19 hawks, and the chance of surviving is 0.5. But your formula gave me the result 0.05. In fact, everything with x food, and 2x-1 hawks and 1 dove, should result in 0.5. But your formula only does that with 1 food, 1 hawk and 1 dove, because then you are forcing the one hawk to meet the dove. Does that logic make sense? EDIT: I just tested it with another example, 2f, 1h, 1d. And in that case your formula is correct (.75), and mine isn't (.83). So it looks like we're both wrong...

@@amber3650 Ack, I missed the chance that two hawks can go to the same food pile, thanks for pointing that out. So basically there are 2f locations to stand (2 for each food pile), and each hawk/dove can only stand at 1 location. Then, the chance that you don't meet a hawk is (2f-2 choose h)/(2f-1 choose h)=(2f-1-h)/(2f-1), and the chance you meet a hawk is h/(2f-1) (I now see where you got it from). So the formula should come out to .5*h/(2f-1)+1*(2f-1-h)/(2f-1) =(.5*h+1*(2f-1-h))/(2f-1) =(2f-1-.5h)/(2f-1). I think the mistake in your original formula was not including the probability that you don't meet a hawk as a coefficient to the 1. Alright, I think this should actually be correct this time. Christ, and combo is supposed to be my good subject...

Gamora : What did it cost? You : 14 minutes and 5 seconds

r/unexpectedthanos

I’m both proud and disappointed

*snaps left fingers*

2:30 what happened to the other doves? Gone, reduced to atoms.

Hi Dio Brando

DIO!

@@atasmaniandevilwithaphone5514 Dio*

@@nukenier-4836 Sir, it was Dio Brando but from part 3 on it's DIO

@@nukenier-4836 also r/woooosh

better to be other way round

Thats a good point

THIS IS TRASH MY CONTENT IS BETTER!!!!

Why you half to be mad? Its only simulation.

Game theory mat pat

😂