<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Social cycling and conditional responses in the Rock-Paper-Scissors game · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1404.5199/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1404.5199/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Social cycling and conditional responses in the Rock-Paper-Scissors game — mentioned by throw0101a</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22977277</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1404.5199:22977277</guid><pubDate>Sat, 25 Apr 2020 11:10:20 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; Is RPS a game of skill? If you do a 2/3, or 3/5, etc, then maybe. Numberphile did an episode on how you&amp;#x27;re more likely to win by following a particular strategy: * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rudzYPHuewc Presumably this works best if the other person is not following the same strategy. The paper that they reference (PDF): * https://arxiv.org/pdf/1404.5199v1.pdf&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1404.5199/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>physics.soc-ph</category></item></channel></rss>
