Patrı̣ck O&#39;Keefe

0

1

114

Joe Shipman@joe_shipman·2d

Can anyone come up with a REALISTIC example of the red-blue puzzle which does not require a powerful villain murdering people?

English

115

0

45

10.4K

Patrı̣ck O'Keefe@pmokeefe·3d

@StatisticUrban Your vote will only save those babies in the unlikely event your vote breaks a tie. If the majority voted Red, Blue babies are dead regardless, however if you voted Red, you'll be there to lookout for Red babies who were orphaned by their Blue parents.

English

just matt@questionableway

0

4

510

Hunter📈🌈📊@StatisticUrban·3d

The original question specified "everyone in the world." There's a critical mass of young children/babies who would not, under any circumstances, be able to understand the question, and would pick randomly. Voting blue is the only way to save them.

last thing i’ll say about the button is that it’s pretty strange how few red voters change their position upon learning there is a substantial contingent of blue voters

English

155

64

2.3K

57.4K

Patrı̣ck O'Keefe@pmokeefe·3d

@madeleinewintr Your Blue vote only saves someone in the extremely unlikely event that your vote breaks a tie. If there was a Blue majority your vote makes no difference, everyone lives either way. If there was a Red majority your vote kills exactly one more person. You.

English

9

Maddy@madeleinewintr·3d

if blue can win 58% even on this website that self-selects for the kind of game theory-brained amoral weirdo that would press red, it couldn't be more obvious that it's the correct option

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

311

292

8K

111.4K

Patrı̣ck O'Keefe@pmokeefe·3d

@lolviolence @jon_stokes Voting Blue only saves your children in the extremely unlikely event that your vote breaks a tie. If there was a Blue majority your vote makes no difference, everyone lives either way. If there was a Red majority your vote kills exactly one more person. You.

English

Dr Kareem Carr@kareem_carr

0

3

61

Jon Stokes@jon_stokes·3d

What's interesting to me about this is that I pressed "red" b/c that was the correct answer to an internet poll, But I knew if it was real I'd have to press blue b/c my wife & at least 1 (maybe all 3) of my daughters would hit blue. I guess IDC about the rest of the world.

If you press blue, the worst case is you die. If you press red, the worst case is you took part in an action that killed just under half of humanity. Clicking blue minimizes the worst-case moral injury. It says you’d rather die than risk contributing to the death of another.

English

23

1

75

7.5K

Patrı̣ck O'Keefe@pmokeefe·3d

@DeepDishEnjoyer Suppose you picked Blue but the majority picked Red - including many children who didn't think it through but had parents who voted Blue. Now those children are orphans in a world where most people picked Red without people like you to look out for them.

English

1

155

peepeepoopoo@DeepDishEnjoyer·3d

one thing to think about is that if red wins even if you immediately survive you are suddenly subjected to a cataclysmicly bad world state where double digit percentages of the world suddenly died and a large percentage of high conscientiousness people died far worse than wwii

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

106

35

1.5K

43K

Patrı̣ck O'Keefe@pmokeefe·3d

@WR4NYGov Consider that your Blue vote only saves someone in the extremely unlikely event that your vote breaks a tie. If there was a Blue majority your vote makes no difference, everyone lives either way. If there was a Red majority your vote kills just one more person. You.

English

Justin Macmahan@JustinMacmahan

4

354

Warren Redlich - Chasing Dreams 🇺🇸@WR4NYGov·3d

I’m a bit shocked at the number of people who: Voted to kill people. Brag that they voted to kill people. And mock those of us who voted not to kill people. I studied game theory. It doesn’t say you have to vote to kill people.

The majority of people pressing blue is the epitome of virtue signaling. 100% of people should just press red and guarantee survival. There’s absolutely zero reason for anyone to press blue, but these sheep think it’s the virtuous choice so they vote for it anyway

English

131

50

1.2K

34K

Patrı̣ck O'Keefe@pmokeefe·3d

@CypressDahlia Consider that your Blue vote only saves someone in the extremely unlikely event that your vote breaks a tie. If there was a Blue majority your vote makes no difference, everyone lives either way. If there was a Red majority your vote kills one more person. You.

English

0

9

808

Maung Thuta@CypressDahlia·3d

You pretty much only press red if you want a ton of people to die lol. Like there's just no other way to look at it. "If 100% of people press red nobody dies" yeah but it's way easier to get 51% of people to press blue for the same outcome lol. You just want people to die.

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

132

78

1.7K

22.3K

Patrı̣ck O'Keefe@pmokeefe·3d

@nic_carter Your Blue vote only saves someone in the extremely unlikely event that your vote breaks a tie. If there was a Blue majority your vote makes no difference, everyone lives either way. If there was a Red majority your vote kills exactly one more person. You.

English

0

4

256

nic carter@nic_carter·3d

Red is unambiguously the "game theoretically correct" position, but it's actually encouraging that the majority still picks Blue, because it means that a majority of people are willing to take on meaningful personal risk to save their neighbor, which I think is beautiful

English

339

53

2K

102.1K

Patrı̣ck O'Keefe@pmokeefe·3d

@gfodor Suppose you picked Blue but the majority picked Red - including many children who didn't think it through but had parents who voted Blue. Now those children are orphans in a world where most people picked Red, without people like you to look out for them.

English

0

1

302

gfodor.id@gfodor·3d

I found it weird that basically zero discourse on the buttons was about preventing the death of your children, which is only possible in a coordinated scenario of pushing red.

English

49

2

78

8.7K

Patrı̣ck O'Keefe@pmokeefe·3d

@NathanpmYoung Consider that your Blue vote only saves someone in the extremely unlikely event that your vote breaks a tie. If there was a Blue majority your vote doesn't matter, everyone lives either way. If there was a Red majority your vote kills exactly one more person. You.

English

1

23

Nathan 🔎@NathanpmYoung·3d

The next one of these that goes viral, I commit to voting blue, because I reckon we are not close enough to doing the ‘all switch to red at once’ to not have it ‘go badly’. So if you vote red next time you’re ‘killing’ me too.

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

118

3

118

7K

Patrı̣ck O'Keefe@pmokeefe·3d

@beigepilled @myhandle If you picked Blue but the majority picked Red - including many children who didn't think it through but had parents who voted Blue. Now those children are orphans in a world where most people picked Red without people like you to look out for them.

English

10

🫧@beigepilled·4d

@myhandle I just realized that people are interpreting this as ‘babies who cannot read or comprehend anything also have to press a button’, which I think would change my vote to blue. But if it was ‘only people who can read and understand questions’, then red

English

4

0

13

631

Jakeup@myhandle·4d

the joke on the reds is that in real life, blue-pressers who are willing to expensively signal compassion and loyalty end up living in high trust communities while vice-signaling red-pressers die alone and mad screaming "but if everyone just"

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

329

212

4.4K

135.2K

Patrı̣ck O'Keefe@pmokeefe·3d

@Ace_Archist If you picked Blue but the majority picked Red - including many children who didn't think it through but had parents who voted Blue. Now those children are orphans in a world where most people picked Red without people like you to look out for them.

English

Hunter Ash@ArtemisConsort

26

Ace@Ace_Archist·4d

The reason why this version is distinct is because it lacks the moral imperative of the other question. If you believe that your children, or other people you care about, may have chosen blue, you have a very good reason to choose the blue button.

If you push the red button, you get $100. If you push the blue button, you get $100 if over half of people push the blue button and otherwise get nothing.

English

25

14

590

11.6K

Patrı̣ck O'Keefe@pmokeefe·3d

@questionableway Consider that your Blue vote only saves someone in the extremely unlikely event that your vote breaks a tie. If there was a Blue majority your vote makes no difference, everyone lives either way. If there was a Red majority your vote kills exactly one more person. You.

English

9

just matt@questionableway·4d

red is an unbelievably phenomenally disgustingly selfish decision and i do not have theory of mind for anyone who would choose it

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

1.2K

153

7.7K

1.1M

Patrı̣ck O'Keefe@pmokeefe·3d

@G0ffThew Consider that your Blue vote only saves someone in the extremely unlikely event that your vote breaks a tie. For a Blue majority your vote makes no difference, everyone lives either way. For a Red majority your vote kills one extra person. You.

English

2

244

Geoff Thew@G0ffThew·4d

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

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

647

345

7.1K

346.9K

Patrı̣ck O'Keefe@pmokeefe·3d

@BenDempsey18 @CinemaWinner Assume people's propensity to vote Blue or Red is a binomial distribution with n = 6,000,000,001. The chance of breaking a tie is ~1/100,000 when p=.5, much smaller for other p. Except for ties, at most one person dies when you vote Blue. You. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_…

English

2

63

Ben Dempsey@BenDempsey18·3d

It’s simple to me. If you think exactly 50% of people will vote blue, vote blue to tip it over and save everyone. If you think less than 50% of people will vote blue, vote red because you can’t save anyone else, but you can save yourself. If you think more than 50% of people will vote blue, it really doesn’t matter since everyone will live. This means a red vote is also acceptable here with no negative impact to anyone. So the real question is - do you think exactly half of the population will vote blue? If not that exact number, then a red vote is either neutral or better, but blue is never better.

English

0

15

510

CinemaWins@CinemaWinner·3d

It’s simple to me. If you believe 100% of people will pick red, pick red. If you believe even 1 person will pick blue, you should pick blue. I think >50% will know the second is the actual reality and they’ll pick blue.

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

294

65

1.6K

67.9K

Patrı̣ck O'Keefe@pmokeefe·3d

@isnit0 Consider that your Blue vote only saves someone in the extremely unlikely event that your vote breaks a tie. If there was a Blue majority your vote makes no difference, everyone lives either way. If there was a Red majority your vote kills one more person. You.

English

1

112

Joe Reeve - 🇬🇧/acc@isnit0·3d

Guys blue is obviously more moral. Sure, red is logical. But blue is more moral. Anyone who thinks in 2nd order effects should advocate for blue. Just like the people who created our high trust societies would. Red voters destroy our society.

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

675

36

855

100.2K

Patrı̣ck O'Keefe@pmokeefe·3d

@joelgrus Presumably you weren't the one doing the driving.

English

35

Joel Grus 🤠@joelgrus·3d

my entire childhood we took long (500+ mile) trips by car instead of by plane, you don't need full self-driving for that

Scenic Oaks, TX 🇺🇸 English

0

15

1K

Patrı̣ck O'Keefe@pmokeefe·3d

@kareem_carr Consider that your Blue vote only saves someone in the extremely unlikely case that your vote breaks a tie. If there already was a Blue majority your vote makes no difference, everyone lives either way. If it was a Red majority your vote kills one more person. You.

English

0

10

265

Dr Kareem Carr@kareem_carr·3d

If you press blue, the worst case is you die. If you press red, the worst case is you took part in an action that killed just under half of humanity. Clicking blue minimizes the worst-case moral injury. It says you’d rather die than risk contributing to the death of another.

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

537

67

1.3K

86.1K

Patrı̣ck O'Keefe@pmokeefe·3d

@_its_not_real_ Note that for a fair coin, probability of 6 billion (approximate number of humans alive today) coin tosses being dead even is ~1/100,000. For a biased coin, odds are much less. That's modelling the human population as equally and independently likely to be Red or Blue.

English

44

Patrı̣ck O'Keefe@pmokeefe·3d

@_its_not_real_ Have you tried pointing out this to Blues: Cases: 1. Dead even - extremely unlikely. 2. Blue majority - your vote makes no difference, no one is going to die whatever you vote. 3. Red majority - Your vote does make a difference, one more person dies. You.

English