@SealWithATuxedo @YuletideFrost I think it's far more likely to have a red majority.
Given the chance, more people will refuse to play Russian roulette than play but have 1 out of an unknown number of cartridges removed.
English
Not Sure
793 posts
@NotSure15933706 @YuletideFrost i wouldnt. its still statistically improbable everyone to pick red, which is why ill still pick blue.
lets assume there are 8 billion people alive right now.
even if 99% of people choose red, 80 MILLION people die. and we all know its still not going to be such a high percentage
English
blue becomes lethal only bc of the red button's clause
Aleksi Liimatainen@aleksil79
if red is the sane default, blue pushers recklessly endanger themselves over nothing if blue is the sane default, red pushers defect for personal gain hate to break it to you but there's no sane default here. it's all in your head
English
@notsoErudite Does your answer change if only people capable of higher reasoning participated?
English
Since everyone was very curious my answer, my answer is obviously blue.
Gotta save the naive, the kids, the blue lovers, and the principally hope-pilled people.
You red button pickers need therapy.
MrBeast@MrBeast
Everyone on earth takes 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? BE HONEST.
English
How do I stop Twitter sharing all these people talking about the blue/red button problem. It's driving me crazy.
I'm a parent of a toddler, so ofc I will always pick blue because my kid won't know the difference and will likely go with the colour she likes more (blue).
I don't judge or blame you for going red. But I don't care enough to see 100s of people trying to justify it by telling me how stupid I am.
English
@SealWithATuxedo @YuletideFrost Would you change your answer if instead only people capable of reasoning were voting? If not, I don't see what you're arguing about.
English
@NotSure15933706 @YuletideFrost thats once again changing the question because the question was if EVERYONE was taken into a room. and there people that arent kids and babies who would be considered incapable of reasoning. people with personality disorders and depressed/suicidal people for example
English
@hellofamil73975 Because pressing a button is so simple, it's more like we're just standing on it, and could either simply walk off or stay put.
Tying anything down complicates things.
English
no it's more like everyone is tied to the track, if you press the red button you untie yourself and nobody else, but if 50% of the people on the track press the blue button everyone is untied? not the same but closer i think - it matches the collective help thing
Rock Solid@ShitpostRock2
Dumbest fucking hypothetical ever posted
English
@pcwithspoiler_ @scarlettscarlia I (and I assume many others) imagine the spirit of the question implies that only people capable of reasoning are voting.
English
@NotSure15933706 @scarlettscarlia There is already a group like that. The question says everybody on earth. That means a lot of kids and babies that won't even understand the question and vote randomly.
English
Red pushers cannot fathom taking individual risk for collective good
Jack@depression2019
It is actually disturbing how dumb the average person is Red gives you a 100% chance of living, you literally get nothing beneficial out of choosing blue
English
@SealWithATuxedo @YuletideFrost There's definitely some interpretation issues. I imagine that the spirit of the original question implies everyone voting is capable of reasoning.
English
@NotSure15933706 @YuletideFrost "look, you're wrong when i change the hypothetical to being something entirely different!"
not to mention all the kids or hell, even infants, that at least one will pick blue out of chance.
this time, youre still burdening the red pressers but also calling blues assholes
English
@ramez But the blue button is unnecessary to press except to save idiots who pressed it.
Even if there were a relatively small external stakes, such as a puppy who couldn't vote but would die if blue didn't hit 50%, it would dramatically justify blue over the current scenario.
English
People push the blue button in real life all the time. Anyone who risks themselves for others they don't know is pushing the blue button. We're not game theoreticians as a species. We evolved in tribes, with pro-social behaviors.
Neal Spackman@NealSpackman
I don't understand all the hullaballoo around this, but no one in real life is pushing the blue button.
English
@SealWithATuxedo @YuletideFrost No I'm implying that personal accountability is a thing.
Say the vote comes with a counter to show how many people picked blue (and only blue), and we all vote sequentially.
If you vote blue while the counter reads 0, YOU ARE AN ASSHOLE.
English
@NotSure15933706 @YuletideFrost red does NOT agree there will be some blues 😭
most reds main argument is 'if we all pick red nobody will die', not acknowledging that there WILL be someone that picks blue.
and you are implying that people should die because you think theyre overly empathetic?
English
People really going crazy with false equivalencies on this dilemma
The actual choice is “button that saves everybody” vs “button that saves me”
In the original hypo, everyone starts on the tracks, it’s a choice to untie yourself or derail the train
SummoningSalt@summoningsalt
A train is coming down a track. Everyone on Earth has the choice to either tie themselves to the track, or not. If more than 50% of people choose to tie themselves to the track, the train turns around and doesn't run them over. Yes or no - do you tie yourself to the track?
English
English
@NotSure15933706 @nerokanyovelle @8BitBeeno The vote is private, you don't know who is on the spikes but there's definitely people
English
Red voters try so desperately to act like:
A) Pushing red is the default and pushing blue is a needless choice
and B) That pushing red has no correlation at all to the possible death of blues
They pretend to be bystanders in what is a 2 choice vote to avoid accountability
HazardousWolf 🇺🇸@_Hazardous_Wolf
It's happening again.
English
@thedooblex @becometheknight Also because you convinced yourself it's the heroic thing to do!
English
@becometheknight I threw myself onto the train tracks because I knew somebody would save me!
English
Because we value human life, and are willing to risk death to avoid harming others. It's called self-sacrificial love. Try it sometime.
Verai@TheRealVerai
@MrBeast I'll never understand why anyone would push the blue button
English
@becometheknight @ImYazter It's unnecessary.
You are risking suicide only to save people who are risking suicide just to save people who are risking suicide etc...
It's a faulty reason to risk death, and that mentality is not conducive to a successful society.
English
@ImYazter I don’t really care what you call it. It's morally correct.
English
@amadeussmash @YuletideFrost It's an abstraction of the blender problem.
Making it buttons causes the ambiguity of whether we start inside or outside the blender.
English
@YuletideFrost yes this is where the moral character resides. Death only occurs if red meets a threshold - it's opposite to the blender problem, where the action to be taken is jumping into a blender and hoping other people save you. Choosing red is accepting constitutive agency in death
English
@SealWithATuxedo @YuletideFrost This comes with the assumption that there will be blues. Red does agree that there will be some blues.
But they overvalue virtue over their own survival and we don't need that.
It's a suicide button.
English
@YuletideFrost its crazy to me how red pressers keep redefining the thought experiment, causing the thought experiment to change. the whole point is that it is framed by burdening the red button with the idea that too many presses is going to kill the blue ones.
English
It's actually kind of fascinating how much the blue button vs red button discourse captures the pitfalls of human reasoning. Both blue button pushers and red button pushers think theirs is the obvious choice. But each fails miserably to explain the other side’s view.
English
@nerokanyovelle @8BitBeeno The blue side started empty. Why would the first person walk under the spikes in the first place?
English
@8BitBeeno If you adjust the scenario such that 10% of people are forced to abstain and will be killed along with the blues if they fail to reach 50%, you'd likely convert a lot of reds.
Blues are the ones avoiding accountability otherwise.
English
@ConcernedC98488 @xevekiah Hiring a hitman will also land you a murder charge.
English
@xevekiah The problem is, the women aren't the ones doing the killing....it's the doctor. The doctors bodily autonomy is not threatened by a baby in someone else's womb. I don't want to police women's bodies, I want it to be illegal for doctors to kill unborn children.
English
Should it be illegal to refuse to donate blood or a kidney to someone who’s dying, even if it’s a child? If a child in your family needed your kidney and you couldn’t or wouldn’t give it, should the law force you to or send you to prison?
If your answer is no because that violates bodily autonomy, a basic human right, then you already understand the argument for legal abortion. No one is required to give up bodily autonomy for someone else, no matter their age or relationship.
You might call it murder, but even laws around killing have exceptions. Self defense is legal when someone’s life is at risk. If abortion were banned in every situation, even when the mother’s life is in danger, then by that logic self defense shouldn’t exist either. But it does.
Most people wouldn’t accept losing their bodily autonomy or their right to stay alive, so it’s worth considering what it means to take that right away from others.
Kia 🧸ྀི@xevekiah
what unpopular opinion about ABORTION can put you in this position???
English
@shunnedmorlock No it's not.
If I jump onto train tracks as it's approaching, it's not every man woman and child's responsibility on earth to save me.
English
If even 5%, 1%, 0.1% of the world population will vote blue no matter what (as you have guaranteed by phrasing the question specifically to encourage pressing blue), it is the duty of everyone else to take a risk and vote blue to save them
English
If 100% of people vote blue, no one dies. If 100% of people vote red, no one dies. This is true.
If 51% of people vote blue, no one dies. If 51% of people vote red, 49% of people die.
If our goal is to minimize death, it is far easier to get 51% to act in concert than 100%.
essentialsalts@untimelysalts
English