— · · · —

@NinaPanickssery @JeffLadish @EigenGender Doesn't work without long-enough hair right? How about: think of 3 long-ish words, convert the parities of their letter sums to a number in binary, then if 0 or 1 choose blue, if 2-4 choose red, if 5-7 repeat.

@JeffLadish @EigenGender pull a clump of a hair out of your head and check whether it’s an even or odd number of hairs if odd pick a random hair and wrap it around your pinkie as many times as it goes round check if that number is divisible by 5 if no you’re in 40% world

You find yourself trapped on an island with 99 identical copies of yourself. If you press the red button, you will certainly die. If you press the blue button, you’ll die if and only if at least half of the clones presses blue. What do you do?

@tenobrus @RaelHelman @Impish_Bunny Is the minimum millions due to trembling hands or parents that aren't compos mentis? If only the former, seems difficult to coordinate blue around, if the latter >50% blue seems feasible, assuming neither, 100% red seems feasible.

@RaelHelman @Impish_Bunny you know for a fact that at minimum millions of children will die if blue doesn't win. 100% pressing red is a pipe dream. choosing guaranteed safety for ur own children when u can so easily coordinate and guarantee safety for all of them is a horrific thing to do

You're a parent. All parents have to take a private vote, pressing a red or blue button. If more than 50% press the blue button, all children survive. If less than 50% of people press the blue button, only the children of red button pressers survive. What do you press?

@WaseemWtesqie @tenobrus

@morsequal @tenobrus That’s touching

@Aella_Girl (1) Those are the two best outcomes but there's a large spectrum between best and worst. For example, 1% of people dying isn't as bad as 20%. More people voting blue can take you from the former to the latter. (2) People weigh their own life more heavily than most others'.

im confused by people saying the right answer is pressing red. the good outcomes are 51% of ppl press blue OR 100% of people press red. the second is obvs way less likely

(I might've mischaracterized your point a bit, so to address it directly: I don't think a consequentially large portion of people would secretly choose red once blue reaches the dominance I'm predicting, I think public debate would swing blue rather quickly, and I think public consensus to evangelize the red pill would overall shrink rather than grow.)

I agree with you that not enough people appreciate how daunting it is to vote blue, but I don’t think the public consensus in a real scenario would go the way you’re describing. If we assume the setup where literally everyone capable of pushing buttons (including toddlers, the mentally impaired, etc) has to vote, then the proposition is basically: “If <50% people press blue, everyone who presses blue will die. Oh also we’ll force some of the people from select groups to press blue.” That would a nucleation point for blue: anyone with a loved one from those groups is basically forced to go all-in campaigning for blue, and then any of their loved ones, and so on, pretty much exponentially. I don't think it would be long before it's the dominant message (due to the aforementioned wave, and consequently any governments who want to avoid catastrophe), and then most people would become duty-bound. At the time of the vote, if it seems likely that more than 50% of people will press blue, I would likely press it too. However if the “be safe out there folks” messaging did stay dominant up to the time of the vote, I would probably vote red. I just don't think that would actually happen, unless the only people included in the vote were compos mentis adults who enjoy living (because then there's no clear nucleation point).

The calculus to press red is, to put it kindly, short-sighted idiot math. It begins and ends with “what input gives me the best odds of living” with no regard for what the world you’d be living in - where everyone you can trust is dead and everyone else knows it - would look like

@G0ffThew @Catface_OJK @biggestjoel "The blue button kills nobody." No this is just wrong. There's a very real probability it kills *you*, and you are not nobody.

@Catface_OJK @biggestjoel The red button kills everyone who hits the blue button. The blue button kills nobody. There is no such thing as “maximally rational consideration” in real life, so a lot of people *will* hit the blue button, so therefore the most ethical AND rational choice is to also hit blue

@SoWhy @chese44 @max_headgame I assume the scenario would be like: you guess VIOLA and see green for I and gray for everything else. Then you think "Several words ending in IGHT fit that description, so if possible I should avoid those (and any other clusters like that) before I get more info"

@chese44 @max_headgame Which requires you to not have already guessed anything with G, H or T in it

no sympathy for people who do the worldle like this. just a fundamental misunderstanding of what game you’re playing. pathetic