Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
The thing I want to bring out here is how both 1) the system doesn't stagnate but 2) it produces very contingent results, because both sides aren't aiming for objectively optimal outcomes, but rather coming to new responses in a very particular environment of competition.
Mostly I want to avoid just calling it an 'arms race' - I want to reach past that metaphor.
Related to the Red Queen hypothesis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Queen_hypothesis … I also like coevolution.
Antagonistic coevolution
I see this term used. I’m not sure that there exists such a thing as non-antagonistic coevolution, which makes the term redundant?
From a Systems Science perspective "interactive (or coupled) dynamic systems" might be what you want. The concept is broad enough to include not only symbiosis and co-evolution (which have biological connotations) but also can describe governments and businesses.
Here's an example of how Systems Dynamics can model an arms race: https://systemdynamics.org/wp-content/uploads/assets/proceedings/1985/kreut463.pdf …
There's "Adversarial machine learning"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adversarial_machine_learning …
Red Queen's Race is a term that gets used
Red Queen
The Red Queen Hypothesis comes immediately to mind. It pretty much *is* an arms race, until the environmental niche changes, after which it's the species' ability to adapt to the change that may matter more. 1/2
But the concept depends on whether you're thinking of something very fat-tailed (natural evolution) or something constrained by rules/structure (a game). 2/2
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
