prior probability

Tit for tat is a famous game theory strategy in repeat games. It consists of cooperating on the first move, then subsequently copying the other player’s move. It is also supposed to be a forgiving strategy; otherwise, a single defection could generate an unending cycle of mutual defections. Assuming the current conflict between the United States and Iran can be modeled as a repeat game, such as an Iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma, then the key question is: which side is most likely to forgive a previous defection or act of retaliation from the other side?

“Trembling Hand” Update (1/11): The Iranian government has confessed to accidently shooting down a commercial Ukranian jetliner.

Section 5 of Rule 8 of the official 2019 NFL Rulebook (available here) defines what conduct constitutes “pass interference.” Although Section 5 contains four separate articles and over 800 words, Article 4 specifically states that “blocking more than one yard beyond the line of scrimmage by an offensive player prior to a pass being thrown is offensive pass interference.” (Canadian Football, by contrast, does not have an analogous rule; see here.) My favorite sports commentator Jim Rome discusses the finer points of the NFL’s offensive pass interference (OPI) rule with CBS Sports Rules Analyst Gene Steratore, but they miss the larger question: does football really need this rule?

Here it is, via WordPress or Google Docs. Once again, I will be using the rise of Facebook–as depicted in the award-winning movie The Social Network–to teach my survey course in business law. (The cover page of my new syllabus is pictured below.)

Happy Three Kings Day!

That is the title of this 2012 book edited by Claire Finkelstein, Jens David Ohlin, and Andrew Altman. This tome (pictured below) contains 18 essays by a wide variety of scholars. Jeremy Waldron, for example, explores the morality associated with targeted killings and argues against the use of this tactic, while Fernando Teson, by contrast, argues that targeted killings are justified against terrorists because they use tactics specifically designed to kill civilians. If you don’t feel like reading an entire book, here is a good primer on the legality of the U.S. military’s existing targeted killing program (via Lawfare). For my part, although I do not address the tactic of targeted killing, here is my 2012 contribution on the “logic of terrorism.”

Check out this pithy report by Rob Beschizza describing an amazing AI program called Confusing Coleopterists. In brief, this program was trained on illustrations of extant beetles from existing zoological textbooks. In the words of Mr Beschizza: “The extreme formality of this art genre, and its placement within the public domain, makes it uniquely apt to the medium of generative adversarial networks ….” (Hat tip: Cliff Pickover.) Note: Imagine unleashing a “positivist AI” on the entire U.S. Code or the Supreme Court reporter. What new laws or SCOTUS decisions would it generate?

To start off the new year on the right track, I have assembled below, for your reading pleasure and intellectual stimulation, my favorite “best of” end-of-year reflections and collection of ideas from 2019. Enjoy!

1. Larry Solum: Downloads of the year 2019 (via Legal Theory Blog).

2. Rex Storgatz: best list of lists (via Twitter).

3. Alex Tabarrok: Most popular posts of 2019 (via Marginal Revolution).

4. Dan Wang: 2019 letter (via Dan Wang’s website).

5. Tom Whitwell: 52 things I learned in 2019 (via Medium).