Awphul

M* Free Cake A poem (metaphor) Thread...

@pawelk411 @uubzu @gfodor And if these numbers were truly representative of the original sample, being as high as they are would require a sizable number of blue pushers to knowingly endanger another person. It undercuts the moral argument and makes the original 58% blue vote highly suspect.

@uubzu @gfodor yes but also picking blue here is extremally immoral

Some of you may die, but that's a sacrifice I am willing to make

@TheCartoonLoon The hubris to demand ithers treat it as seriously as you. You're just oozing pure copium here. Get over yourself and your entitled opinion. Is that you Jigsaw?

Trying to explain to someone in my notifications that while i know hypotheticals are not real but you should treat the question as if it is real He literally can't get it. He doesn't even know how he would feel if he didn't have breakfast I'm stunned

@chests @ML_ennial The trust in the moral authority of Jigsaw is about the most insane thing out of this whole experiment. [Red sheep, blue sheep, me sheep, you sheep.]

@chests @ML_ennial If I go on knowing (not assuming) then I demand the game be cancelled for violating the rule of anonymity (not that Jigsaw will accept it). But if I truly know (not assume) that it means half of all children will die it does change things.

a really weird aspect to this discourse is some people saying “oh when it said EVERYONE on earth you meant EVERYONE?!”

@wokenessucks For those unfamiliar, an angel shows him a dark abyss and asks him to leave. Blake refuses to accept the reality the angel presents. After the angel leaves, it turns into a new, pleasant and peaceful world expanding all around him.

@wokenessucks Am I naked? Are the doors far apart? If I open one but don't go through does the other disappear? I don't trust my options, I don't just pick. How long can I stay in the white room? Is this the 4th "Memorable Fancy" in William Blake's "The Marriage of Heaven and Hell"?

Blue people, I’m going to give you the exact same scenario but in a much clearer format. Tell me if you would still choose blue. Imagine you’re suddenly ripped out of your normal life. Whatever you were doing stops instantly, and you appear wide awake in a big, empty white room. You know you’re not dreaming. A red door and a blue door appear in front of you. For all you know, every single person on Earth is in the exact same situation. No phones. No communication. Total isolation. Then a message appears: “You have two choices. If more than 50% of people go through the blue door, everyone survives. If fewer than 50% go through the blue door, only the people who chose the red door survive.” By walking through the blue door, aren’t you literally volunteering to play in this twisted game? You’re betting your life that a majority of terrified strangers will all take the risky option at the exact same moment. Zero communication and no second chances. If you wouldn’t actually do that in this crystal clear scenario, why are you still defending the blue choice in the original?

@ReznovRulz I thought the same thing when I saw it reversed with blue calling reds midwits and claiming to be smarter. The amount of copium from both sides is amazing.

Imagine thinking your IQ is 130 or above but not understanding how standard deviation works. 68% of the population votes blue here.

@chests @ML_ennial And that evil being isn't required to let you know that because it violates the anonymity requirement of the test. In fact, including infants is a violation of that rule as it tells you a percentage is already blue.

@chests @ML_ennial Until it's stated there is an assumption required. An evil being could just as easily say those not competent enough (under 15 or disabled) are assigned red by default. At 25% of population the remaining 75% needs to be greater than 2 to 1 blue. Do you trust Jigsaw?

@Cesarwitha_t @muyhiram True, if I assume that in a voluntary scenario that everyone feels a need to press blue versus just walking away. I see zero reason to ever push red in a voluntary real world situation other than being just plain evil. Blue creates risk, red compounds it.

@AwphulFonetic @muyhiram well, your incentive is to push the percentage of blue buttons higher to prevent people from dying.

Everyone who presses the 🔵Blue button will die if more than 50% of people presses the 🔴Red button. PRESS ONE BUTTON!!

@arnar105 @muyhiram That isn't what this one said. It specifically said blue button pushers die as a result of red button pushers over 50%. Why would I push red to kill people? Why participate at all besides saving people from themself. There are no baby hostages in this scenario.

@AwphulFonetic @muyhiram Then be left behind. Your inaction has led you to even worse outcomes then what even red button voters expect.

@Daniel86Cycles @FundoTM @TerraDraca "But, if we just shut off our brains and emotionally decide if we value ourselves or others more..." sorry, but I just don't operate like that. I can't just separate logic from morals and go with my emotions or ideals.

@Daniel86Cycles @FundoTM @TerraDraca Why does it feel like we're no longer trying to rationalize choices, but the experiment itself? What causes the risk? Does it already exist, or does our choice create it? Does the 1st blue release a deadly disease worldwide and red is a vaccine? It's entirely too vague.

Today's thoughts on the red and blue button question. People who pick blue claim reds are killing people but is that actually true? If 60% of people have already decided to pick red, does me picking blue actually change anything? No, aside from my own death, it changes nothing because nobody knows my vote and I have no ability to influence other people and change their mind. I can only control my choice and nothing else. In fact, there is only ONE scenario where my decision could be argued to matter beyond my own survival: If the vote was completely deadlocked and I was the deciding vote. The odds of that happening: Basically never. So no, I am not basing my decisions on a scenario that will never happen anyway.

@Daniel86Cycles @FundoTM @TerraDraca It can also be selective in usage like, "everyone can vote in elections" with it implied it only pertains to eligible voters. It's either clarified or we assume intentions.

@AwphulFonetic @FundoTM @TerraDraca Jokes aside, "everyone" just means people.

@theramblingfool @ReaperII7 @UrDadNamedCody @Kik3sl4y3r I have to point out that "certainly less will" is essentially the exact thing you mocked in the OP.

@ReaperII7 @UrDadNamedCody @Kik3sl4y3r Certainly less will. It's just the reality. There's also a big divide between seeking out a moral dilemma and rising to the occasion when one finds you.

*Every anonymous poll shows blue winning* "Those anonymous respondents are virtue signaling."

@FundoTM @Daniel86Cycles @TerraDraca I've always heard mosquitos are attracted to blue. The real irony is that actual lemmings are likely close to 100% red.

@Daniel86Cycles @AwphulFonetic @TerraDraca Apparently ant are more attracted to the color Red so that's it for everyone I guess.

@RemyTheRedVT @MrSavage04 Key word being "estimate" which is an assumption. The entire exercise is based on what one assumes. If one assumes it isn't an actual vote, but the act of pushing the button, then one should also consider cause and affect + root cause. Why is it happening at all? Who set it up?

@AwphulFonetic @MrSavage04 So the babies aren’t automatically assigned blue, the 50% average is me making an estimate of how many kids would just smack the blue button bc button pretty, based on colour preference, not an assignment the administrator gave it.

I’m late to the red/blue party but here’s my take I guess lol. Simplest view I can give is: Yes, if everyone is able to touch the button with full awareness of what they’re doing and no chance to fuck up, red makes sense. But that isn’t how reality would ever play out. In a scenario where -everyone- gets the red/blue button at the same time, you have the following: -old, baby, blind, deaf, asleep, unconscious, incapacitated, etc people who cannot touch either button, or end up touching the blue button in error -no guaranteed ability to make sure people you care about touch the red button -awareness that no matter how you feel about it, a certain number of people will touch blue. The red/blue button includes people who don’t touch the button at all as part of who dies if 51% of people don’t touch blue. So every coma patient, every person in surgery, every quadriplegic, or person with an inability to choose dies, not just blue button pushers. It also doesn’t clarify whether or not, for example, unborn children who are close to birth count as ‘everyone’ by the standards of whatever horrible entity decided the red/blue button question would be a fun thing to pose to humanity. So what do we do if the death radius includes fetuses inside their mothers as people who didn’t choose? And would you really want to take a chance on whether or not they are included since there’s no way to guarantee it? Under that scenario, choosing red guarantees a lot of people die through no fault of their own if more people press red than blue. I’m not going to pretend I’m a saint, because I’m not. I cannot rightly promise that I wouldn’t press red if there was a guaranteed way for me to ensure everyone I love did too. But because I can’t guarantee that, I would most likely press blue, because that is the only way I could maximise the chance that my loved ones, including the ones who can’t choose would survive. Is it silly from a pure survival standpoint? Yeah, probably. But I don’t think I could live with the guilt of knowing I killed my sisters unborn child, or my toddler niece who likes blue more than red, or my dad when he’s unconscious in surgery because I wasn’t willing to risk my life to try and hit a measly 51% target.

@Daniel86Cycles @TerraDraca Of my 2 dogs I'm going to miss the one that would most likely push blue the most (don't tell them, I'm not supposed to have a favorite), but with all the cats we already know which way the vote is going.

@AwphulFonetic @TerraDraca If animals don't push red then I guess that's it for them too.

@RemyTheRedVT @MrSavage04 The "babies are assigned" is another flaw because the "vote" was made by the test administrator. Therefore, if babies are blue the test administrator has technically made a blue vote and should share its fate. Maybe blue is a wrong assumption by that logic.

@AwphulFonetic @MrSavage04 Yep, another example of the flaw in the original hypothetical

@Daniel86Cycles @TerraDraca Well hypothetically, to the alien overlords everyone includes not just humans, but also their pets. Which way did your cat vote? The entire premise is absurd I'll just sit in the booth as long as I possibly can.

@AwphulFonetic @TerraDraca People are teleported into a booth and presumably teleported out. So the duration of the vote is "not long enough to affect results" however long that ends up being.