@sbmcnamara @justalexoki Frame perfecting the buttons is by far the strongest argument I've seen to voting red by far.
English
Froosh
256 posts
I read the original like a pedant again.
The 50%+1 having to press blue for all to survive is clear - so comatose, infants and those who died during the question all count in the denominator
The Red pressers only count those who actively pressed the red and they all survive
Those who press neither survive at 50%+1 blue, but perish at less
But - being pedantic
There is no stated limit of only pushing one.
The ideal solution is a method to simultaneosly push both blue and red where you are guaranteed to survive, while also contributing to the tally for blue.
It also does not state that it needs to be 50%+ of all pushed buttons - just that 50%+ of all people push blue.
He later states that phrasing matters - that is how he phrased it
English
@sbmcnamara @justalexoki I feel like the only edge case that actually has any validity as far as it being unclear are when it comes to the comatose. I see some reds think the obvious answer is blue when including toddlers, while others say their vote doesn't matter so might as well save themselves
English
then all the more reason to pick red.
The rules of the game are patently unclear in regards to edge cases, how the question is communicated, what happens to those who press neither button (perhaps because they have no clue what is going on)
In that unclear chaos, self preservation is the only sane choice - unless you generally want to die
English
@umezawashido @tmsvrb @lymanstoneky Yes, there are plenty of scenarios where I would choose myself dying over my baby. If I die jumping into a river to save my baby, that may result in me drowning and my baby dying slightly later. I’m still not going to watch safely from the riverbank keeping my feet dry
English
@Froooooosh @tmsvrb @lymanstoneky So in case of a bad result, you want your baby to starve to death, i got you.
English
I’d press red. I have four kids.
If your reading of the scenario is “we are offering the hypothetical only in English and to 3 day old babies who can’t even push buttons” you’re an idiot. Tye scenario necessarily implies the choosers are limited to people *who can understand the choice*.
Udi Wertheimer@udiWertheimer
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
English
@umezawashido @tmsvrb @lymanstoneky Same thing that would happen if my baby picked blue and I died picking blue. I would have died trying to maximize the chances of my baby surviving. I would pick blue while hoping my baby picked red
English
@tmsvrb @lymanstoneky What if you baby picks red and you die picking blue?
English
@digitalN0mad49 @tmsvrb @GaryLaserFren @lymanstoneky You’re acting like the genocide of billions is perfectly legal in most countries. Nothing about the premise implies any adherence to an existing legal framework
English
@tmsvrb @GaryLaserFren @lymanstoneky It isn’t a valuable thought experiment if it doesn’t track to the real world. The term vote implies agency. Children don’t have agency by law in any country anywhere in the world.
English
@PoetSteveWallis @FabricioNakata @JeremiahDJohns The OP of the original hypothetical clarified in a reply that babies would be teleported into their own private room to push one of the two buttons with no outside input or guidance from others
English
@FabricioNakata @JeremiahDJohns If you're holding babies up to buttons, you're writing your own hypothetical. That's not in the wording. Answer invalid.
What about coma patients? How are they choosing? Again, that's writing your own question, not answering the one posed.
Colour blind people? No answer is valid.
English
The red and blue button folks are talking past each other. Obviously the game-theoretic solution for your own personal safety is red.
But some of us have this thing where we care about other people and having a societal Schelling point of blue saves billions of lives, so,
Romy@Romy_Holland
@_Void_Apostle_ @Aella_Girl the hypothetical involves babies smashing buttons. it involves old ladies with dementia. it involves the 250 million illiterate adults in india.
English
@PhilGarber5 @udiWertheimer The right course of action depends on how effective the bait of 500 million toddlers is for you personally. Like you said, it’s pretty effective, but if you would still vote red without knowing what your wife and child voted, then it clearly isn’t effective enough
English
@Froooooosh @udiWertheimer In a zero coordination scenario the right course is to vote red because it’s too great a risk for everyone if blue misses the threshold and there’s no assurance that it will be met without extensive polling and coordination.
English
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
English
@PhilGarber5 @udiWertheimer The entire problem is based around everyone’s vote being private so you won’t know whether the other parent picked red or blue though. You’re voting without any coordination
English
@Froooooosh @udiWertheimer Yes that would make sense if all the kids are at stake but only half are. At least one parent should press red so the surviving kids are not orphaned. There are different orders of sacrifice.
English
@PhilGarber5 @udiWertheimer I have a 15 month old and put out two of his play blocks to see what he might choose. Beelined straight for the blue block which makes the decision even easier to accept for me personally. Lot of mothers and fathers in this world who would sacrifice themselves for their kids
English
@LincolnMargison @mchwllms5 @CypressDahlia Would you vote red if each blue had to be beaten to death by a randomly chosen red? Red winning 60-40 would give you a 2/3 chance of needing to get your hands dirty. Likely around a 1/5 chance that you would need to personally kill a child. 1/12 that you would match a toddler
English
No because it's also the right and logical choice to make, if you care about your own survival. Blue is just as self fulfilling. An entire group of people that do not need to exist, they could all have chose red. The counter argument is 'some people will choose blue though!'. Why? To save blues.. Self fulfilling. Blues exist to save blues. Reds exist to avoid death. Which one is more valid of a group?
English
Final thought: the argument seems to be that "in the real world" (aka you lost the poll) people are selfish, and therefore you must press red. But... you also pressed red. Every red vote claims they are a victim of other red votes' selfishness. But nobody confronts this idea lol
English
@Gnizzll69 @Zombieshoot @CptAncapistan @questionableway There’s no coordination involved so you don’t know what your kids voted. Most parents would choose to pick the option that gave their kids the best chance of surviving. Any child under 5 is essentially a 50/50 with no logic assumed
English
@Froooooosh @Zombieshoot @CptAncapistan @questionableway So it would be easier for families to vote red together to ensure their survival. Why are we automatically assuming kids will all pick blue?
English
@PhilGarber5 @udiWertheimer The kids are kids. Plenty of people understand that roughly 50% of the 1 billion kids under 5 will likely press blue and have no issue pressing red. Up to you whether you consider the deaths of 500 million infants and toddlers to be bait
English
@Froooooosh @udiWertheimer So these kids are bait for a genocide trap?
English
@digitalN0mad49 @udiWertheimer There's also nowhere in the world where it's legal to kill billions of innocent people but the button wizard doesn't seem to mind that either lol. Anyway, OP clarified that infants and toddlers are all voting in a room by themselves with no input from others.
English
@udiWertheimer And specifically, there is nowhere in the world where children are legally allowed to vote. It’s a reasonable assumption that children aren’t voting. I’m not going to cave on that one
English
@PhilGarber5 @udiWertheimer It's the complete opposite. The OP of the question even clarified that infants and toddlers would get teleported to a room and have to push a button with no guidance or input from anyone else. There's no coordination possible according to the OP
English
@udiWertheimer No, the question is structured to invite coordination by its parameters. No one is going to choose blue irl without feeling out others’ intentions, just as they are in these discussions.
English
@banisheddime @Stretchedwiener 500 million infants and toddlers are still pressing the blue button
English
@Stretchedwiener Ok. Challenge accepted. Here's the EXACT SAME exercise, without your suicidal empathy activated by Blue being presented as the main character, which you can't see past
Press Red, win $100
Press Blue, win $100 if 50% also press blue
What moron is pressing blue?
English
If you want to propose a different version of the thought experiment - write it up.
This one, the one we're talking about - "Everyone" votes. Not just people over certain age, not just people who understand the question, not a subset. Everyone.
You don't vote for your kids. You don't even get to tell them how to vote. They vote. Everyone votes.
And plenty of adults "vote" by choosing randomly, in real elections. Because they don't have a strong grasp of what they are voting for. They don't deserve to die, regardless of the callous insulting opinion so of "red choosers" who want to cull "low IQs".
As a parent - you make choices that risks their lives without their consent more often than you want to know.
Christian Ohnimus@ChrisOhnimus
@Stretchedwiener @waitbutwhy If true, I push Blue. But it doesn't specify how edge cases are handled. "Vote" implies intention and not random assignment. For example, if I have to vote for my kids (or other dependents) am I obligated to choose Red, since Blue risks their lives without their consent?
English
@thetweeteregg @ericzb13 @maylivesforever @Stretchedwiener The OP clarified that infants and toddlers vote just like everyone else e.g. get teleported into a magic room and push a button with no influence or direction from anyone else
English
@ericzb13 @maylivesforever @Stretchedwiener This hypothetical has shown up multiple times over the years. I believe the original clarified only adults vote.
English
@Gnizzll69 @Zombieshoot @CptAncapistan @questionableway Idk why everyone thinks India would be so biased towards red. The average Indian family unit is much larger and closer than the average American family unit. If you’ve ever talked to any Indian parents about their eldest sons, you know they’re voting whatever it takes for them
English
@Zombieshoot @CptAncapistan @questionableway That's my main focus. They also say Cooperation to get blue votes will happen, that's not how it goes though. Gun to head, instant decision, over 70% are going red. Hell, 80% of India is gonna vote red so blue is already at 1 billion down
English
@pulyus @whittomd @BobMurphyEcon Because “everyone” includes children (and the OP clarified that they did intend for babies to be teleported in their own room free from any influence and push whatever button they felt like)
English
@whittomd @BobMurphyEcon Why would a child be pushing a button? In this stupid hypothetical that everybody wants to change to be even a dumber hypothetical, why would a child ever be given the ability to push their own button?
English
To show this isn’t altruism versus selfishness: suppose parents are required to push the button on behalf of their children who are 5 or younger. Which button do you push on their behalf?
Tim Urban@waitbutwhy
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
@x____mas @h00py_ @ReddDrift @BobMurphyEcon It should be even easier to vote blue if everyone is voting by proxy. 90% of red voters don’t want red to win, they’re just scared of themselves dying. Voting by proxy removes that fear and makes blue much more likely to win overall
English
@h00py_ @ReddDrift @BobMurphyEcon Good point. Forcing people to go with your choice completely changes the question.
The original problem doesn't have this. Blues risk their lives but cannot demand Reds to follow their lead.
English
@altypants @TheXrunner55 @questionableway According to the OP who posted the question, you wouldn’t be able to tell your kids what to vote for. You would need to make your vote without knowing what button they pushed
English
@TheXrunner55 @questionableway Thats my followup question for blue button pushers: "If you had kids, what button would you tell them to push?"
English