If I am choosing the algorithm that all civilisations are going to follow, if one civilisation succeeded that would lead to large positive utilities for all future civilisations. Why would I let the game end?
I assume that each civilization only cares about itself. So one civilization succeeding does not “lead to large positive utilities for all future civilisations”, only for itself. If civilization A assigns positive or negative value to civilization B succeeding, the expected utility calculations become more complicated.
You cannot “let the game end”. The fact that the game ends when one player receives R only represents the fact that each player knows that no previous player has received R (i.e., we arguably know that no civilization so far has successfully colonized space in our neighborhood).
If I am choosing the algorithm that all civilisations are going to follow, if one civilisation succeeded that would lead to large positive utilities for all future civilisations. Why would I let the game end?
Not sure I understand your question, but:
I assume that each civilization only cares about itself. So one civilization succeeding does not “lead to large positive utilities for all future civilisations”, only for itself. If civilization A assigns positive or negative value to civilization B succeeding, the expected utility calculations become more complicated.
You cannot “let the game end”. The fact that the game ends when one player receives R only represents the fact that each player knows that no previous player has received R (i.e., we arguably know that no civilization so far has successfully colonized space in our neighborhood).
Wouldn’t it be more accurate to state that R represents an enduring multi-system technological civilization and not mere colonial presence?
I don’t think we can arguably claim that space in our stellar neighborhood has never been colonized, just that it does not appear to be currently