SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A mathematical model that looked at the sudden collapse of empires or states was created, with an intent to look at why social disorder can appear from an apparently stable state (an example cited is the Arab Spring in 2011). Factions within a state make choices described by game-theory about whether to accept the political status quo, or to attempt to better their circumstances through costly rebellion.
We find that a small amount of dissatisfaction is typically harmless to the state, but can trigger sudden collapse when there is a sufficient buildup of political inequality. Contrary to intuition, a state is predicted to be least stable when its leadership is at the height of its political power and thus most able to exert its influence through external warfare, lavish expense or autocratic decree.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Wednesday May 14 2014, @07:24PM
Actually it sounds like a reasonable piece of work. It is, of course, VERY oversimplified even in the original, much less in the popular report. E.g., to what extent does having a real choice between Tweedledee and Tweedledum increase stability? Does this change as people become more aware of the identity of the two choices? In what way, and to what degree? (How do you quantify this?) Etc.
This may actually be included in their computer model, but I'd be extremely shocked if they got it right at this point. And measuring the significant data, or even defining it precisely enough to get accurate measurements, is not now to be expected.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.