ckjd

@ALifeAfterTech @DellAnnaLuca Also, voting blue has a 1 in 8 billion chance of saving something. Not 50%. "Voting blue has a 50% chance of saving something"

@ALifeAfterTech @DellAnnaLuca Am I to assume that "infinite value" refers to human life? In that case, voting red has a 100% chance to save a human life, and voting blue has a 100% chance to enter a crazy death lottery where you are gambling human lives.

Red voters advise their kids (and others) to vote red, so they’re saved for sure. Blue voters advise their kids (and others) to vote blue, thereby gambling with their lives. But somehow red voters would be those caring less about their kids and others in general? The idea that blue is the moral choice hinges on the unwarranted assumption that blue wins with certainty.

@CuqueQ @AnnaKent99341 @kacchaket @leap_dog Yes, it can be all at the same time - that doesn't change the math. Imagining you are the final vote makes it easier to understand what the probabilities really are. You have a 1-in-8-billion chance of changing the "Randian post-apocalypse. They might as well 100% have a parent.

@ckjd @AnnaKent99341 @kacchaket @leap_dog So number one it all has to be at the same time, no communication, and secondly, don't you think it's in your best interest as a parent to make sure that your child grows up in, you know, modern civilization? The best time to live in? Instead of a Randian post-apocalypse

i think it really does say a lot about you whether you instinctively conceive of the red button as the kill millions button, or the blue button as the kill yourself button

@keyokkud @SlayerOmega Everyone doesn't have to press red. People are free to choose the blue "Please enter me into a crazy suicide lottery" button if they wish. I don't think it's a sensible choice to enter a suicide casino gamble, but that is everyone's right if they wish to.

@SlayerOmega everyone pressing red is even worse of a gamble, u realize that right

why the fuck would you press red? everyone survives if we press blue, it's guaranteed survival for everyone, by default everyone should be pressing blue, without even needing to coordinate. default state of human should be to want and guarantee best outcome, not settling.

@ScarcityMan @fimbres_paul @smojjingmcgee @MarkChangizi "candidate B will murder everyone who voted for candidate A" is the exact opposite though. It would be "candidate A will kill everyone who votes for him, unless X amount vote for him". You would be insane to vote for him.

There are an infinite number of ways to rephrase the premise, but each rephrasing carries the bias the person rephrasing wishes to impart on the voters. That's the main issue I have with the suggestion from the OP. I went too far by suggesting it didn't match the premise, which it technically does, but in spirit, I believe it doesn't. Here's another rephrasing to make my point: Everyone must vote for one of two candidates in a first past the poll contest. They have identical platforms except that candidate B will murder everyone who voted for candidate A if he wins. Everyone can just save themselves by voting for candidate B, right? But what kind of person would vote for candidate B? It is precisely this element of responsibility that red button pushers are refusing to accept or see, or cannot comprehend, and the OP suggestion makes it MORE difficult, not less difficult. Not intended as a literal parable about --insert modern candidate here--.

— The Suicide Button — No need for a Red button at all. Just have a single (Blue) button labeled, “Press me to commit suicide by midnight.” And then in fine print it says, “Guaranteed to work unless more than 50% of humans end up pressing their button.” Are you suggesting it’s now selfish to not press the button? Because that’s exactly the Red button answer in the equivalent Res/Blue button case.

@smojjingmcgee @MarkChangizi @ScarcityMan "Everyone must vote". Therefore pressing red is the same as not pushing blue in a 1-button scenario.

@MarkChangizi @ScarcityMan It is not 'formally the same'. If someone pressed neither button and red won, they'd die. Pressing the red button prevents you dying, whereas your scenario, no-one dies UNLESS they press a button. It's embarrassing how many of you can't even understand the original scenario.

@ALifeAfterTech @DellAnnaLuca If it was a coin toss, I would agree with you. It's not a coin toss though. You have a 1 in 8 billion chance of changing the outcome in a positive way. The math doesn't lie.

@ckjd @DellAnnaLuca If you think they are they same then that explains where the issue comes from. Pushing red to vote for killing your child and each of the other 8 billion people on a coin toss is psychopathic.

@ALifeAfterTech @DellAnnaLuca It is the identical scenario. If you think the scenario is different, that's possibly where the issue comes from. Pressing Blue and voting to kill your child's parent for a 1-in-8 billion casino gamble is pretty negligent.

@ckjd @DellAnnaLuca That's a different scenario. You wouldn't know you're last. You don't know if more blue votes are needed or it its impossible. But even if you did know you were last but didn't know the current vote, voting blue is still the correct moral choice.

@ALifeAfterTech @DellAnnaLuca Imagine you are the very last person to press. There is Blue, a 1-in-8-billion chance you can affect the outcome and a real chance of death; or Red, a 100% chance your child will still have a parent to look after them.

@DellAnnaLuca Even if you can dicuss it, you will not know how your child voted. They may not listen to. They may think it is a game. They may be unduly influenced by others or social media. They might make a mistake. Is that a chance you want to take?

@ImNotOwned @marcusdiazcom You can't tell your kids to pick the option that is potential suicide vs being 100% ok. That is negligent to the extreme. I do not believe you actually mean this.

@marcusdiazcom yes, because I’m picking blue too.

The situation is “everyone on earth” not “earth’s rational actors” This is actually the whole point of the question, it does not ruin it.

@HomelessEconomy @JoelDPN @ChrisPacia That's crazy. Think about the first blue button pusher. It introduces DEATH. Blue is literally the button that kills people.

@ckjd @JoelDPN @ChrisPacia Red button pushing is what makes the lottery suicidal at all

If you vote differently in these scenarios congrats you are irrational. Time to do some introspection and figure out why you respond emotionally to things rather than logically.

@plasticolicious @UsingLyft It's actuallly really easy to think about this scenario: Imagine you are the very last person to press. There is Blue, a 1-in-8-billion chance you can affect the outcome and a real chance of death; or Red, a 100% chance you will be alive to be with the people you love.

@UsingLyft Why on Earth would you press red if there’s a non-zero chance the people you love pressed blue?

Why would anyone just not press red lmao. What would make you go there and be like “yeah I’m gonna play this crazy game and risk it all by pressing blue?” Why? Why would you do that

@kacchaket @leap_dog But up to a certain point, you are contributing to the problem. Every blue vote is adding another death.

@ckjd @leap_dog Voting blue is trying to save everyone else who votes blue. You don’t know who they are, but you know they surely exist, because there will always be others who think like you: That others’ lives are as precious as your own

@kacchaket @leap_dog Who is the first blue voter trying to save? Voting blue is literally, and I mean *literally* introducing death.

@ckjd @leap_dog Blue = “I will try to save others from dying in this ‘lottery’, even if it means I die” Red = “I will contribute to others dying in this ‘lottery’, as long as it means I live” Dying isn’t a worse result than casting my vote to kill the very ones who’d risk their lives to save me

@SilverCalZ0ne @BobMurphyEcon Blue = "I wish to enter a crazy suicide pact." Red = "I do not wish to enter a crazy suicide pact." How is this anything other than the direct, intentional choice of blue voters?

@BobMurphyEcon You did kill the blue voters by voting red, or the blue voters didn’t kill themselves by voting blue. You don’t get your cake and eat it too. And, in my opinion, every red voter collaborated on taking an action that kills people en masse. That’s disgusting AND murder

OK I think I'm done. I believe the exchange below summarizes much of the conversation. (Note: I'm not even saying Red is obvious anymore, largely because so many people are pushing Blue.)

@JoelDPN @VoxAeternus @ChrisPacia That's such a strange way of looking at it. The blue button is the "kill blue" button. Imagine if only 1 person presses it. That's literally what it does.

@VoxAeternus @ckjd @ChrisPacia “If you vote red, there’s a chance the people who pressed blue will die,” correct, and that chance exists because of the possibility of red winning the vote. You voted for the “kill blue” party and then claim it’s not your fault they died. Doesn’t work that way.

@AnnaKent99341 @kacchaket @leap_dog Imagine you are the very last person to vote. You have a 1 in 8 billion chance of affecting the outcome, or you could press the button which means your children will definitely have a parent.

@kacchaket @leap_dog Right? It is obv from the fact that so many see it as a survival test. Like no, ur daughter or nephew is gonna press blue and u will end up killing them. If they r so sure they can get everyone (or more than 50%) to mobilise and press a single color, why not save everyone?

@kacchaket @leap_dog They don't see it that way because that's not what the buttons do. Blue = "I want to enter an insane suicide lottery." Red = "I do not want to enter an insane suicide lottery." You have a 1-in-8-billion chance of affecting the blue vote.

@leap_dog They never see it as “save millions together with yourself” vs “save yourself alone”… wonder why

@udiWertheimer It's actuallly really easy to think about this scenario: Imagine you are the very last person to press. There is Blue, a 1-in-8-billion chance you can affect the outcome and a real chance of death; or Red, a 100% chance you will be there to look after your kids.

almost nobody who has children would press red unless they know for an absolute fact that their kids pressed red if you think there’s even a 5% chance your kids pressed blue, you will risk your life to improve their odds even by a tiny bit to take this a step further most women are probably hard-wired to press blue as a motherly instinct anyway, even if they have no children. so at minimum you have a 25% baseline for blue right there, which completely tips the odds so i think blue actually wins by a landslide if this was the real world and not a social media app for incels in other words humanity always had the biological programming to ensure blue wins

@drwatsonabc @JoeGotBlown @ZPostFacto By the way, every parent should press Red. With blue you have a 1 in 8 billion chance of affecting the outcome, and with red you have 100% chance to be alive to look after your kids.

@ckjd @JoeGotBlown @ZPostFacto I changed my mind. I want to push the black button which kills everyone regardless of how many people voted blue. Our species is too fucking retarded to be allowed to colonize othe planets, let alone inhabit this one.

@drwatsonabc @JoeGotBlown @ZPostFacto It's logical because that's how every significant voting you've ever participated in has worked. It seems odd to assume this one specific vote would suddenly be different for no reason.