RedDrift

@tessiesbestie One time, I was second appointment up. Showed up 20mins late. I was in a bad mental spot mental so booked as early as possible. He then questioned me on how bad it really was and told me I was holding up other appointments and to come back tomorrow for a mental health plan...

I’m deeply fascinated by the concept of being the first appointment of the day at the doctors office and them still taking 20 minutes to see you

@tylerblack32 I honestly feel it is very similar to people speaking out against forgiving student debt. The idea that you should put in hard work and suffer to get results, and its not fair if you don't have to when I did. Then its just wrapped in whatever rationalisation.

The discourse on GLP-1 is unhinged. Science brought a drug that : ⏬cardiovascular events reverses fatty liver ⏬kidney decline ⏬addictive cravings ⏬all-cause mortality And the worst, loudest part of the internet decides the real problem is that people are using it. /1

@engineofgod @sanjehorah If someone was helping them do it, that can be classed as immoral under your framework but them choosing and doing it themself results in a bad decision not an immoral one I am not saying it IS moral but people often cant explain their beliefs because its actually just a feeling

@engineofgod @sanjehorah A bad decision is not an immoral one. Your arguements are correct, but they dont answer the question about morality. People have a visceral reaction that it is immoral but are unable to explain why. Immoral means going against the moral or ethical standards laid out by society

pressing the blue button is immoral for the same reason that suicide is immoral

@runarorama At the individual level yes, but the whole point is you dont know what others press and its unreasonable to assume a perfect 100% vote. This uncertainty drives people to pick blue to try to turn uncertainty into certainty. Thats not the same as removing the penalty.

The interesting thing about this red/blue malarkey is that it presents a volunteer's dilemma/assurance game-looking setup, minus any upside. In a true assurance game, cooperation gives everyone some benefit. Here, enough blue presses only remove the penalty that the pressing itself created.

@dioscuri Two layers of uncertainty makes it pointless, why I don't have any problem dying I am not going to pick it for no reason, and not knowing what I am fighting for means I cannot reasonably determine if it is worth it. In which case, I am always going red.

Red/blue button variant: Everyone in the world has to take a private vote by pressing a red or blue button. If the percentage of people who press blue exceeds an UNKNOWN THRESHOLD, everyone survives. Otherwise, only people who pressed red survive. Which button do you press?

@IXianVernius The point is less that all parents will pick blue, but that there is extremely high likelyhood some will, among other types that want to protect those around in uncertainty. Thats why it is a play on risk of your life or society at large.

I know most of you, my dear followers, are more than sick of this discourse, but I'm sorry. I can't not bring this one up too. The incessantness with which this specific argument is invoked is the one detail that actually just confuses me. Like, are they so deep into the characterization of red as just edgy teenagers that they can't possibly imagine a parent that opposes them? Whatever kind of person they think reds are, is it really so hard to imagine that kind of person aging, having children and not changing? Because I assure you, I told my actual, not a hypothetical person, mom about this shit (actually talking to your parents about things. Imagine that.), and her response was, "Well, that sounds stupid. Red obviously."

@bitcloud Dude... Its ongoing, thats the point. There is no number. Might want to have a read on what actually happens, I dont care if you are for or against, but at least be educated on what actually goes on.

@ReddDrift The mRNA dosage manufactures proteins inside the body. What number or volume is manufactured?

Never heard an answer to this. It seems even the world's leading experts are comfortable with shrugging this one off.

@engineofgod @sanjehorah Okay, so and what changes about what I said?

@ReddDrift @sanjehorah I am chronically ill.

@bitcloud You asked the precise protein dosage. I gave the exact weighted dosage of the active spike protein compound a specific mRNA vaccine uses in each dose. I even gave you an approximate count of how many individual protein molecules are in the dosage. So I need some elaboration.

@ReddDrift That's not what I asked

@bitcloud Or, this many individual protein molecules: 3.7241067e+13

@bitcloud Its pretty easy to find. I think it is just no one is respinding to you. I will give you the answer, here is a monograph for a recent Moderna COVID-19 MRNA vaccine: ebs.tga.gov.au/servlet/xmlmil… The answer? 10 micrograms in 0.2ml of solution. Done, solved it for you.

@wil_da_beast630 ANYONE no matter what group, claiming to be 'the most ethical or moral people' are 100% speaking BS. Left, Right, Muslim, Christian, American, Chinese, whatever... If morals are not objectively real, you cant claim a 'solid case' for being the MOST at a subjective thing.

"Morals" aren't objectively real, but there is a VERY solid case that harm principle rightists are the most ethical people - we demand nothing of you and force nothing on you.

@DellAnnaLuca @bratricek I will explain it for you. A mother will vote blue for the same reason you vote red, she cant read minds. Most mothers value their children's lives over themselves, hence the same reasoning but pressing blue instead or red. You having to ask, is demonstrating that disconnect.

You don't get it. It's precisely because I cannot read other people's minds with 100% accuracy that, for most people, red is the best choice. Voting blue would require absolute confidence that at least 50% of people would vote blue, too. I'm not arrogant enough to pretend I have this certainty.

> your parents 📘are probably voting blue because they have no idea how you will vote and want you to survive eve if they should die > your kids are voting probably randomly, my kids cant understand the math, so they will just press 🟥📘 > your wife is voting 📘to ensure survival of your kids, her parents and yours game theory is not applied on families and civilisations, its applied to a bunch of random individual dudes in a fucking prison with zero relationship and zero value in survival of others, it assumes that your survival is the most precious outcome most of the population are parents we are not animals by pressing 🟥you increase a probability of 📘dying by +1/x% during history, after such events (mobilisation, religious disputes, uprisings etc), blues📘 mostly persecuted 🟥for desertion and build institutions to prevent 🟥from reaching to power i fucking love this whole discussion, because I was instinctively in the red🟥, then switched sides

@stevehou But you can also reverse it, choosing red pushes the world one step closer to killing all blue voters and because people are not perfect, there will be plenty of blue voters. I am not arguing against red. But the consequences of garuanteed life is, pushing for garuanteed death.

Strictly dominated option won the poll. Red strictly dominates blue bc if fewer than 50% chose blue, those that chose red survive anyway but those that chose blue would die. If you presumed voters are “rational” as in they thought this through, you’d conclude altruism. In reality, this is “bounded rationality” as most people likely didn’t think through the implications and chose the feel good option without knowing they had taken on hypothetical lethal risks.

@engineofgod @sanjehorah And the chronically ill, the braindead, or those with terminal cancer? Imposing your ideal that they should keep living when suffering is not a great argument for it being immoral. Not smart? Probably, immoral? Not really. Otherwise based on that any logical flaw is immoral.

@ReddDrift @sanjehorah Because it's logically flawed, it assumes nothing will change about your dire situation in life and that is unknowable. It's unknowable because if you have free will the future is unknowable and we can only guess at what the future might be.

@prerat People pretend to be logical but if you change your answer based on phrasing, you are either doing so because more chose the option or because you weight that phrasing different. If you are rational you pick the same unless your reasoning is dependent on what others will press.

it was interesting that the comments for both of these were full of people saying "see everyone, this OBVIOUSLY clarifies the original problem!!!" not realizing the other poll with the opposite result existed too

@Impish_Bunny I guess it depends on if everyone votes at once or if live feedback is provided

i actually think it’s immoral for anyone to press the blue button because you are forcing everyone else into a situation where they have to take on risk of death to protect you from your own decision

@OwlZphi @mlonnroth @mhartl Yeah... No one would vote, its just an election.

@ReddDrift @mlonnroth @mhartl But guess what would happen if, in order to vote in elections, the voter had to face a 10 to 90% risk of death?