Thread by @magitweeter, (market design for the “marketplace of ideas”: a thread)So. I have a [...]

(market design for the u201cmarketplace of ideasu201d: a thread)

So. I have a day job, which is researching game theory

(the mathematical modeling of human interaction, so to speak)

and it& #39;s rare that my day job intersects with other stuff tugging at my mind

so hear me out for a sec

You& #39;ve probably heard stuff like u00abin the marketplace of ideas, attention is currencyu00bb.

Market design is a field that uses game theory to understand the structure of markets and maybe guide them to better outcomes.

So how about u201cmarket-designingu201d the u201cmarketplace of ideasu201d?

Part 1: is that even possible?

In economics there& #39;s this thing called u201cperfect competitionu201d, which is an idealized version of a goods market in which

(by mathematical necessity)

society achieves as wonderful an outcome as it can get, by people simply looking out for themselves

Now, the conditions for perfect competition are very idealized indeed (buyers and sellers are free to enter and exit the market, goods are indistinguishable from maker to maker, no one has power to individually set prices...)

Hence perfect competition is nonexistent in reality

One of the economic roles of the government is to regulate imperfect markets into something closer to perfect competition

(i.e. designing less imperfect markets)

this is despite the popular misconception that

perfect competition = u201cfree marketu201d = unregulated market

Now for a cute, innocent analogy:

u201cregulating an imperfect market can* lead to better outcomes for societyu201d

analogously,

u201cregulating the u2018marketplace of ideasu2019 can* lead to better outcomes for societyu201d

(* depending on how it& #39;s done, of course)

Another way to put it:

the link between u201cfree marketsu201d, unregulated markets, and optimal social outcomes (in the distribution of goods and services)

resembles the link between u201cfree speechu201d, unregulated speech, and optimal social outcomes (in terms of the exchange of ideas)

And yeah, i& #39;ll readily acknowledge that

(mayyyybe it& #39;s too late to say this)

markets might not be the best way to solve or even the best way to conceptualize either the distribution of goods and services or the exchange of ideas

but let me play with these concepts for a bit

So part 2: is that even desirable?

Sure, i know i& #39;m not on the most firm philosophical foundations

But let& #39;s take it as given for now that the market analogy is a good way to think about the exchange of ideas

(one hell of an assumption, to be sure)

My claim is not only that existing u201cmarketplaces of ideasu201d (plural) are horribly broken as they are, but that they& #39;re broken in precisely the ways that can be fixed via adequate market design.

So let& #39;s go there

Take your favorite social institution where ideas are exchanged. Each social network is its own u201cmarketplace of ideasu201d. So are news media (print, air, online). So is academic publishing (ugh!!!!). Protests. Books. Entertainment.

(and they variously meld into larger marketplaces)

Now, what& #39;s an u201coptimalu201d outcome like in a u201cmarketplace of ideasu201d?

Take scientific publishing. Ideally the market would help the generation and propagation of knowledge, as efficiently and openly as possible

(hopefully with proper compensation for the folks doing the work)

Instead we get studies that don& #39;t replicate

and papers hidden behind paywalls that publishers extort governments and libraries to allow behind, profiting obscenely off the work of other people.

Same with Facebook: want to stay warmly in touch with the people you know? Nah, have cruel memes and strife and people being a@#!%oles to each other

Twitter: here to follow your favorite thought leaders in real time? Hmm, how about hate mobs and bad-faith arguments instead?

The ideal outcome of a u201cmarketplace of ideasu201d is that the good ideas win,

but in the examples above there& #39;s a problem of misaligned incentives

having good ideas would be a good idea,

but good ideas suck and instead the market rewards p-hacked studies/paywalls/s#!&%ty behavior

And that& #39;s what good market design is meant to do: it establishes rules that realign incentives to help better outcomes along

Take for example Reddit& #39;s r/ChangeMyView. Its rulebook is quite different from other less regulated places, and exchanges are more productive as a result

Now, i& #39;m not saying that r/ChangeMyView is flawless (its flaws are pretty evident)

or an example of u201cperfect competitionu201d in a u201cmarketplace of ideasu201d

or even that more sites should have rules like CMV& #39;s

it& #39;s just an example that market structure can help shape social outcomes

Part 3: wat do?

I honestly have no idea. So far this is just a scratchpad for my thoughts on the matter

and u201cif you agree that it makes sense to treat ideas like a market, then maybe setting better rules can improve our exchangesu201d is a go$#!&mn anticlimax for a conclusion

but there could be a research program behind

u201clet& #39;s study idea markets to see what the incentives are and what interventions should and shouldn& #39;t worku201d

Personally i& #39;d start with some rigorous mathematical modeling (i.e. useless toy models) & #39;cause that& #39;s where the fun is

I doubt anyone will ever spontaneously find this thread, and i& #39;d be flattered if anyone read it in its pitiful entirety.

But i& #39;m throwing out this idea, and if i ever choose to pursue this line of research then i can come back here for motivation should i lose it.

THE END?

Latest Threads Unrolled: