"Billions" is a gripping drama series that delves deep into the intense rivalry between Chuck Rhodes, a determined U.S. Attorney, and Bobby Axelrod, a shrewd billionaire hedge fund manager. The series weaves a web of strategic decisions and moral complexities grounded in game theory, particularly highlighting how these elements influence power dynamics. The show explores the impact of these strategic moves on personal and professional relationships, set against the backdrop of high-stakes financial and legal battles.

The narrative provides a unique lens on how individuals and organizations employ game theory principles, such as the prisoner's dilemma and strategy of "tit for tat." These concepts are used to highlight the choices characters make and the repercussions these have in their quests for victory and dominance. This continuous interplay of collaboration and betrayal showcases human behaviors under pressure, potential ethical degradation, and the quest for survival.

Main takeaways from the video include:

Please remember to turn on the CC button to view the subtitles.

Key Vocabularies and Common Phrases:

1. gamify [ˈɡeɪ.mɪ.faɪ] - (verb) - To apply elements of game playing, like point scoring and competition, to encourage engagement with a task. - Synonyms: (play, engage, motivate)

But today, we’re going to argue that among its many facets, billions reflects on how games structure our lives and how when we gamify our goals, it can have a corrosive effect on our sense of morality.

2. sociopathy [ˌsoʊ.siˈɒp.ə.θi] - (noun) - A mental disorder characterized by a disregard for social norms and the rights of others. - Synonyms: (psychopathy, anti-social behavior, disorder)

He also has a penchant for cold calculus bordering on sociopathy, as he betrays his friends and family to realize his ends.

3. pervasive [pərˈveɪ.sɪv] - (adjective) - Spreading widely throughout an area or group of people. - Synonyms: (widespread, prevalent, ubiquitous)

Game theory is all over billions, sometimes explicitly.

4. iteratively [ˈɪt.ər.ə.tɪv.li] - (adverb) - In a manner of repeating a process over and over again, usually with the aim of approaching a desired goal or result. - Synonyms: (repeatedly, sequentially, continuously)

Games like the prisoner’s dilemma get a little more interesting when played iteratively, that is, over and over again.

5. astroturf campaign [ˈæstrəʊˌtɜːf kæmˈpeɪn] - (noun phrase) - A planned effort to mimic grassroots support or public interest, usually to influence opinion or policy. - Synonyms: (faux grassroots, fake advocacy, pseudo-campaign)

Spot like this will kick off our astroturf campaign to make it look like the area is getting a bailout, not a death sentence.

6. erosion [ɪˈroʊʒən] - (noun) - The gradual destruction or diminishment of something. - Synonyms: (corrosion, wearing away, decay)

Early in the series, Sacker’s father has this conversation with principle doesn’t usually go away all at once. It’s a creeping erosion.

7. malaise [məˈleɪz] - (noun) - A general feeling of discomfort, illness, or unease whose exact cause is difficult to identify. - Synonyms: (discomfort, unease, dissatisfaction)

That kind of competition made me sick. It literally brought on feelings of malaise.

8. double bind [ˈdʌb.əl baɪnd] - (noun phrase) - A situation where an individual receives two conflicting messages, with no correct or satisfying option. - Synonyms: (paradox, dilemma, no-win situation)

What do you do when there’s no play to be made, but no matter what you choose, it'll end in disaster. Classic double bind.

9. retain [rɪˈteɪn] - (verb) - To keep possession or control of something. - Synonyms: (keep, hold, maintain)

Axe retains people who exhibit unflinching loyalty and cuts loose anyone who does not.

10. defect [dɪˈfɛkt] - (verb) - To abandon one's country or cause in favor of an opposing one. - Synonyms: (desert, abandon, forsake)

If you defect once, there's everyone else in the office who could testify against you at any time.

The Problem With Game Theory The Philosophy of Billions

On the surface, Billions is a drama chronicling the rivalry between a ruthless billionaire and an equally ruthless US attorney vying for their own brands of justice. But today, we're going to argue that among its many facets, Billions reflects on how games structure our lives and how when we gamify our goals, it can have a corrosive effect on our sense of morality. And while people losing sight of their morals is a common refrain in media, Billions frames it in a novel way with game theory. Welcome to this Wisecrack edition on Billions.

Billions is the story of Chuck Rhodes, US attorney for the southern district of New York, his billionaire nemesis, Bobby Axelrod, and the people enmeshed in their personal war. Rhodes is an ambitious prosecutor who fights for the little guy, using his clout in office to put white collar criminals behind bars. He also has a penchant for cold calculus bordering on sociopathy, as he betrays his friends and family to realize his ends. With higher public office in mind, he picks his cases, forges alliances, and does a fair share of backroom dealing. He's flanked by Kate Sacker and Brian Connerty, two ambitious and morally driven prosecutors in his office. All the while, he tries to maintain his relationship with his wife, Wendy, who works as a performance coach for the man her husband is trying to imprison.

Chuck, the manipulative man of justice is contrasted with Bobby Axelrod, a mega rich hedge fund manager who never forgets his humble beginnings. His staff is unflinchingly loyal, especially his right-hand man, Michael Wagner, aka Wags. But like Rhodes, Axelrod's drive to succeed is marred by morally and legally questionable behaviors, insider trading, and a stubborn sense of pride that leads him to flaunt his wealth to law enforcement. This all contributes to an ever-increasing divide between him and his wife, Lara, and his protege Taylor. More than the clash of Chuck Rhodes versus Bobby Axelrod, Billions explores how the road to power is paved with corruption, lies, and eroding morals. And it's the concept of game theory that highlights just how this happens.

So what is game theory? While you may intuit that it's the study of things like poker, and that's not wrong. It's more broadly the study of how people make decisions in a strategic manner. Game theory is all over Billions, sometimes explicitly. In the world of Axe Capital, game theory is used in the name of making more money. Traders hedge their bets, leverage positions, and take short-term losses for long-term gains. They also mislead their competitors and try to manage the flow of information to the outside world. For the office of Chuck Rhodes, game theory is employed a little differently. It's not a matter of multiple parties trying to outsmart each other on the stock market. Rather, it exists in the crafting of plea deals, political maneuvering, and determining investigative tactics.

The prisoner's dilemma is as two people commit a crime together, let's say, robbing a bank, they get busted, sort of the prosecutors only have enough evidence to convict you of a lesser crime. You're separated from your fellow robber and not allowed to talk. But if both of you keep quiet, you each get one year in jail for trespassing. If you rat on your buddy, they'll get the maximum of ten years, and you'll get off scot-free. And vice versa if they rat on you. But if you both rat on each other, you get a little leniency for the bank robbery, but still have to serve eight years.

Billions employs the prisoner's dilemma as Chuck's office is trying to get a guy named Pete Decker to testify about Axelrod's insider trading. If Decker cooperates, great. He can stay out of jail. If he doesn’t, there’s another investor more than willing to snitch first. Mister Decker, approximately two and a half hours ago, we had someone sitting where you are now. A young man from a fund that I'm not at liberty to name. And he was downright chatty. But to be clear, we don’t really have anyone. Chuck and Spyros are acutely aware of how their job intersects with game theory.

The prisoner's dilemma can be used to understand more than just who's going to jail. It can describe any situation where there's an incentive to betray your compatriots, but where everyone is worse off if everyone does it. Think of waiting in line at a show. Everyone gets inside quicker by waiting their turn. If one person cuts ahead, they get the benefit of the line without paying the cost. If everyone tries to cut, the line devolves into anarchy, and everyone has to wait longer. It's the prisoner's dilemma with more than two people.

The paramount importance of civilization in human history rests with its role in promoting cooperation. The prisoner's dilemma can help us understand why loyalty is so important to Axe Capital. In an environment where anyone can get caught by the feds and bring Axe's legacy crumbling down, Axe retains people who exhibit unflinching loyalty and cuts loose anyone who does not. The name of the game is cooperating with Axe and not defecting to the feds.

In the world of Axe Capital, these situations don't happen in a vacuum. If you defect once, there's everyone else in the office who could testify against you at any time. Axe's demands for loyalty beyond all else removes any doubt. In a situation like the prisoner's dilemma, nobody defects to the feds and everyone's better off.

Games like the prisoner's dilemma get a little more interesting when played iteratively, that is, over and over again. And when we frame the relationship between Axe and Chuck as an iterative game, it starts to look a lot like the prisoner's dilemma. Throughout the show, Chuck and Axe go to further and further extremes to hurt each other. It starts with psychological warfare. Chuck tries to goad Axe into buying a beach house that will draw public scrutiny. Axe gets a seat on a company’s board just to spite Chuck's father's mistress. And Chuck arrests dollar bill.

Game theorists have studied strategies to the prisoner's dilemma when the players have to play out that dilemma over and over again for points. One of the most effective strategies is tit for tat. This strategy in game theory was pioneered during a computer tournament of the prisoner's dilemma in 1980. The price of any betrayal always comes due in flesh. If they go back to cooperating, you cooperate. If they don’t, you don’t. It's remarkably simple and follows basic human morality. But if both parties are abiding by tit for tat, you can end up precisely where Axe and Chuck are, where one wrongdoing begets a spiral of revenge.

We can translate the overall dilemma into one of our handy dandy charts called payoff matrices. Chuck is player a, Axe is player b. Cooperating more or less means they leave each other alone. If Chuck isn’t going after Axe and Axe isn’t bankrolling hundreds of lawsuits against Chuck they’re both kind of happy, but neither really got what they wanted. So we can say they’re both cooperating. If Axe leaves Chuck alone but Chuck is still after Axe, then Axe has no leverage and will probably end up in jail, and Chuck will be well on his way to being governor. And if they both keep sabotaging each other, sure, they may get the satisfaction of revenge occasionally, but neither one of them is particularly happy.

Axe and Chuck both choose defect instead of cooperate and ultimately enter a downward spiral. As a result, Wendy kicks Chuck out of the house after he's spied on her notes, and Axe's legal troubles contribute to him eventually losing Lara. Axe has to give up his ability to trade, and Chuck faces the prospect of going to jail as a result of his need to get the upper hand on Axe. The only resolution comes when the two reach an impasse.

Enter the ice juice scandal. Chuck finds out his father and friend Ira are going to invest in an IPO for a company called Ice Juice and leaks that information, knowing Axe will manipulate the stock to get back at Chuck. So Axe fakes a listeria outbreak to tank the stock, which is just what Chuck wanted to happen. Axelrod will go to jail for manipulating the Ice Juice stock.

But Chuck's wife Wendy shorted the Ice Juice stock, making it look like she and her husband benefited from the stock manipulation. Mafi, it's Wendy Rhodes. The Ice Juice short. How do I get a piece of that? And since Chuck has the evidence that incriminates Axelrod for Ice Juice, they’re both stuck. Either one of them getting revenge means they both go to jail. They both reach a cooperative conclusion that isn’t great, but certainly better than their protracted war. With the help of Wendy, they both have to give up their egos but avoid jail time as a result.

Heres why all this Billions illustrates the shortcomings of living life like it's some kind of hyper rational game. Early in the series, Sacker’s father has this conversation with principle doesn’t usually go away all at once. It’s a creeping erosion. For game theorists or just hyper rational decision makers, life becomes a set of strategic decisions to win the game or optimize your outcomes. But just as the game slowly makes Chuck lose everything he has, other characters slowly lose all sense of principle.

Perhaps the best example of this erosion lies with Taylor, an outsider intern at Axe Capital who quickly climbs their way to being Axe's protege. Taylor has an acute understanding of game theory and used it to crush their opponents in poker, but eventually realized that their love of winning and empathy were incompatible. Part of Taylor's value lies in the fact that they're not playing the same game as all the other traders. But once Taylor joins Axe Capital full time, we slowly see how a person once involved in Occupy Wall Street, can become just as manipulative, cruel, and money hungry as.

Taylor eventually betrays even Axe because loyalty just didn’t add up in their long term calculus. So, how do you escape the game, so to speak? You go meta this game. Outside the game comes front and center with, what do you do when there's no play to be made, but no matter what you choose, it'll end in disaster. Classic double bind. The game so far has been Chuck and Axe in a revenge spiral, with Wendy stuck in between. Instead, Wendy reframes it as not a zero sum game between two rivals, but a cooperative game of which she is the mediator.

So, is game theory a tool for us to hack our lives, to get what we want, when we want? Or should we be cautious of how the games we play can change us to the core? Let us know in the comments.

Television, Game Theory, Psychology, Economics, Innovation, Inspiration, Wisecrack