English
94SweetGoats
278 posts
94SweetGoats
@94SweetGoats
please do not do this
Mažeikiai, Lietuva Beigetreten Mart 2017
18 Folgt1 Follower
@PaulLeach51 @GarrettPetersen That removes agency from the equation, making it a pointless thought experiment. If you can not reliably predict in any way what people press, no rational decision can be made other than to press red and save yourself.
English
There is a black button. Everyone in the world gets a chance to press the button or walk away. If at least half of people decide to press the button, nothing happens. If fewer than half of people press the button, everyone who pressed it dies.
Do you press the black button?
English
@MistakeCanadian @prerat Well Jesus died (he didn't need to) for sinners (stupid blue voters)
English
@SoonyXboneUhh @CarlosBB666 @0xfdf I assumed Satan was running this genocide vote thing and not, like John F Kennedy or something.
I think most blue voters are assuming it's 100% of humans that are somehow voting
English
@CarlosBB666 @0xfdf Because a vote is a conscious decision where you what you’re doing.
A blind person just pressing a buttons is not a vote.
English
Game theory is fun, but there is actually a neat deontological basis for both choices, ethically. The "everyone survives" cases are 1) everyone presses red, 2) a majority press blue. Since "everyone presses blue" contains 2, both choices survive Kant's categorical imperative.
Tim Urban@waitbutwhy
Everyone in the world has to take a private vote by pressing a red or blue button. If more than 50% of people press the blue button, everyone survives. If less than 50% of people press the blue button, only people who pressed the red button survive. Which button would you press?
English
@alx I actually had no idea the pool was that shallow.
I had no idea...
English
BRING BACK THE GOOSE POOP AND ALGAE!
Gwen ☕@GwenpostingTTV
I hate this trashy classless administration.
English
@shaggysurvives I think this is the best (and one of the few that I actually like) arguments for red. This is one of the only few that could sway me.
English
@JamieBonkiewicz "If Trump were assassinated millions would celebrate, but nobody would actually attempt an assassination" is an extremely weird belief.
English
Stop. Staging. Fake. Assassination. Attempts.
Riley Gaines@Riley_Gaines_
Stop. Trying. To. Kill. Our. President.
English
@YCFederation Not to victim-blame but if you're gonna do something like Rhodesia, no half-measures. Too many half-measures and everything explodes. Either do it or don't do it.
English
@fleshsimulator It's a true absurdity that there are a billion of them, while they just casually kill themselves all the time.
English
They die like hamsters
🅰️SIADecoded@asia_decode2
🇮🇳Indian man seeks chair, finds boiled soup.😒
English
I love when buying ice cream causes shark attacks, my favorite causation.
Philippe-Antoine Hoyeck@PAHoyeck
English
@___frye B = Hero
A = Villian
C/D = fairly reasonable and a little lucky
English
@blister @WomanDefiner Ok but if red wins 50% of children die.
You cannot influence their vote, it's private.
That changes the question entirely for me.
English
@WomanDefiner I said this in another thread, but this is probably the clearest example of the concept of "suicidal empathy".
Literally everyone survives if they press red, but people are choosing to pick blue to "save everyone", regardless of their choice.
I love this example.
English
@taqnull @robertlasagna1 What if it was the stone age for 100 years, and you have a vision and knew that beforehand?
English
@robertlasagna1 Counterargument: The “if everyone would just work together and…” people being gone would probably pave the way to a new golden age within 10 years.
English
@wfenza However:
In Red-World society collapses and I no longer can get ice cream, so there is a great risk that it's actually anti-hedonist and I live in Mad Max.
English
Which is the more virtuous answer? Let us decide based on the ten cardinal virtues of my personal ethics
1. Honesty - no specific guidance. Honesty says only to make your true choice, not the one that sends the best signal.
2. Bravery - pick blue. It is a truly brave act to risk one's life for the benefit of others, whether they are deserving of it or not.
3. Reason - pick red. Your vote is always certainly not the deciding one, so why risk your life for what is essentially an expressive act?
4. Humor - pick blue. If your own altruism is what gets you killed, that's much funnier than if you're left alive after a bunch of other people get killed.
5. Autonomy - pick red. Don't let your survival depend on the mop and their foolish choices.
6. Agency - doesn't favor either side. It just means you should choose for yourself, not as a result of pressure from either side. Since there is more pressure in my social circles to choose blue, red is probably the more agentic choice.
7. Hedonism - pick red. Can't experience pleasure if you're dead.
8. Efficiency - no guidance. Both options seem equally efficient.
9. Disagreeableness - pick red. All the moralizing stuffed shirts say to pick blue.
10. Equanimity - pick blue. It's the chill thing to do.
So on the side of blue, we have bravery, humor, and equanimity. On the side of red, we have reason, autonomy, hedonism, and disagreeableness. Tough call. I can see why this is so controversial.
Tim Urban@waitbutwhy
Everyone in the world has to take a private vote by pressing a red or blue button. If more than 50% of people press the blue button, everyone survives. If less than 50% of people press the blue button, only people who pressed the red button survive. Which button would you press?
English
@BarneyFlames Why do you guys think blue forces people to do things? It doesn't.
Blue stakes only your own life, red saves only your own life.
This is not comparable to coercive systems like "lockdowns" or "communism" or "immigration" or whatever.
English
What percentage of blue button pushers would support the govt forcing fat diabetics on a diet with the threat of prison ?
Do you actually believe that people must be saved from stupid decisions even at the cost of putting everyone else's life at risk ?
English
@mlonnroth @glcst I think like this:
The Green Party's idea is that the majority of votes matter and the small number at the end matters less.
The Yellow Party thinks that the majority of votes are inconsequential, and only the minority of votes matters.
I think Green Party wins here, right?
English
@glcst A lot of people seem to confuse contribution in an election with being in some way the swing vote. Is this how you view voting in general? Marginal effect equals outcome?
English
Most people are approaching the red/blue question from the PoV of your contribution to the outcome. In reality, with 8 billion people, your marginal contribution to the outcome is 0. So we end up with this discussion about morality. But the question is more interesting: what is your theory of mind about what would the outcome be without your vote?
If I thought most people would press red, I'll press that too. Not because I want to "contribute" to the outcome, but because I think the outcome is already determined.
There was a poll running around where you were the last vote, and the results were shown to you at that point. The current split is 50/50. Results were >90% blue!
I'd be curious to see the other way around: you are the last one. 60% pressed red. What do you do?
English
@glcst Why do people make this argument bout voting all the time?
It's like saying "a single soldier obviously cannot win a war, therefor soldiers should not fight in the war because a soldier cannot win a war"
But the paradox is that the side that generally thinks like this loses.
English
@hyperliberalism @shlevy Communism is bad because it is coercive.
If you think communism is bad it it's about "empathy" then you don't understand why it is actually bad, so you can't fight against it, and also you are probably a psychopathic asshole.
English
@shlevy We're still not doing a communism, dude. Nice try.
x.com/hyperliberalis…
Antifederalist Caesar@hyperliberalism
This is a poll asking "should we do a communism?" and blue is what you push when you answer "yes." That's why so many blue pushers brand the red pushers as "evil" (and suggest they should, actually, be killed). Communism: not even once.
English
@White_Crayon_00 @shlevy I'm assuming this whole thing is the work of MegaHitler or Satan or Cosmic-Jigsaw.
The whole thing is stupid but you can stake your life to save all the babies that Satan wants to kill.
English
@shlevy Everyone in the world who can understand the question. What are you going to do? Hold up a red button and a blue button for a child to randomly select? It defeats the purpose.
English
@shlevy The question does not explicitly exclude wacky things like "babies can magically answer somehow"
It does explicitly include "everyone in the world votes privately"
Red voters just want to answer a question that was not asked.
English
@MannOhneListe @gaymergir Your toddler child is about to run into traffic.
This is a very stupid choice, you astutely perceive.
I'm saving the stupid toddler.
English
@gaymergir It's not the altruism that's irrational. It's the fact that to be maximally altruistic you have to save people who are irrationally choosing blue in the first place. Why the fuck they would do that is beyond me.
English
Pretty much all social species have some level of "irrational" altruism, you cannot have any sort of society without it
David Shor@davidshor
We asked this to a large sample of nationally representative Americans - blue wins by a 3:1 margin!
English