@NBA @FDSportsbook Gross. Should we sell an exciting playoff G6? No, let's focus on there being a 10 point underdog.
English
Jobu
994 posts
Check out the odds for today’s game on Prime courtesy of @FDSportsbook and tune into the action starting at 7:00pm/et!
More Info: tinyurl.com/4mrcwf4z
English
@ComerCody511 @MFollowill Disagree. The issue with the current system is worst team is locked into T5 pick, 3rd worst team is locked into T7, etc.
New system means you lotto every pick. So teams will be indifferent to whether they’re 4th worst or 10th worst. Huge difference.
English
@MFollowill Last time they flattened the odds it shifted tanking from the bottom of the league to the middle. Teams actively dodge playoffs for a pick. This’ll just do more of the same. + Jazz owner addressed the core problem, the roster rules are broken and the only way to improve is tank
English
Well one I don’t understand why if there are executives who acknowledge this is an overcorrection (which it is) that they apparently aren’t speaking up more urgently to encourage stepping back to consider a less “overcorrected” solution.
Two, in 27 seasons of being around this. I have certainly observed no one associated with teams considers losing as a badge of honor.
Shams Charania@ShamsCharania
NBA commissioner Adam Silver said on a recent Competition Committee call, according to sources: "We should have a system where you should hate to lose. It shouldn't be a badge of honor. Losing should be uncomfortable." The new change is not as drastic as relegation to a lower league -- but a penalty for being at the bottom. Many league executives understand this may be an overcorrection, but one the majority believes is necessary.
English
@MFollowill In that light, it seems silly to say Team X should be advantaged in the (extremely difficult) effort to become a contender just bc (A) their star got injured; (B) they sold their players; or (C) (worst of all) they accelerated season-ending injuries and played suboptimal lineups
English
@MFollowill I'm coming around on it. Usually the 20th best team is not meaningfully closer to a championship than the 30th. And generally the only way to become a contender is to add an MVP candidate. So maybe it's best to give all noncontenders equal odds to land that guy in the draft?
English
@AriDavidPaul @realtimeai @uncatherio idk if you saw the re-framing with the giant blender. Cracked me up. Wish I took more philosophy in college, because it's endlessly fascinating.
English
@AriDavidPaul @realtimeai @uncatherio Yeah, agreed. A critical clarification needed is whether we have time to build consensus. If so, then let's go door-to-door confirming that we are all pressing red.
But if it's a pop-up vote, you know billions are voting blue (e.g., my wife and kids would). Gotta try for them.
English
As a game theory question, it’s boring and easy. As a political question, it’s fascinating and reveals a great deal about why democracies struggle.
Superficially, blue looks like the collectivist, selfless, moral answer. And as you’d expect, plenty of people not only assumed that to be true, but moralized aggressively at those who understand that’s not factually true.
Anyone who picks red is guaranteed to live, including if everyone does it. It’s objectively the better and more moral choice for most and to recommend to others. Blue is a kind of stochastic suicide button.
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
His name is now on some federal buildings, his signature will soon be on the dollar bill, his face will be on coins and national park passes. And now Trump is putting his own picture on US passports. apnews.com/article/passpo…
English
We're doing the "Blender" game again
There is a large blender.
Everyone in the world has to decide whether to step into the blender. If at least 50% of the people do step into the blender, it will be unable to overcome their inertia to get started, and everyone survives.
If less than 50% of the people step into the blender, then they all get blended up into paste and die.
People who do not step into the blender suffer no adverse effects.
Would you step into the blender?
(Blue=step into the blender, Red= don't do that)
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
@fuseprime1 @awesomecat347 @waitbutwhy It’s not suicidal to risk yourself for a better outcome for yourself and others.
English
@awesomecat347 @waitbutwhy Why would being in those categories (apart from suicidal) mean you press Blue?
You have identified those that will though, suicidal ppl.
English
Suddenly standing alone in the room, I begin by imagining humanity banding together and blue winning in a landslide, and I feel a rush of pride. Red is the genocide button. Blue is the “save humanity from this nightmare” button. I know what kind of person I am.
As my hand hovers over the blue button, I can’t help but imagine a gun pointing at my head with a bullet in one of the chambers. I feel a surge of fear shoot through my body.
Then I think about all the other people staring at the blue button and thinking the same thing. Surely some of those who initially decided to press blue will succumb to the fear. It starts to feel like a gun with two loaded chambers. A stronger pulse of terror.
The more I think about it, the more I worry about other people thinking about it. My heart races.
Then I look at the red button—a gun with no bullets in it. A glorious feeling of relief washes over me. Will I hate myself forever if blue wins because enough others were better and braver than me? But don’t I owe it to my family to protect myself? One vote won’t change anything anyway, right? It’s all irrelevant because the mammal I live in has already made up its mind.
I wince and press red.
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
@BooneW @christoaivalis @CloudKenshiro @waitbutwhy Thanos is snapping his fingers and disappearing billions here, based on a binary vote. It’s an absurd premise either way, but it seems like many red voters want it to be an easy decision and so ignore the kids and just assume the blue voters are all idiots they don’t mind losing
English
@christoaivalis @CloudKenshiro @waitbutwhy It was a reasonable assumption to make
Including children and the mentally unfit make blue the obvious choice and the question uninteresting
English
@waitbutwhy @AJamesMcCarthy That’s where I land… I’m positive my wife and at least one of my kids are voting blue.
English
@AJamesMcCarthy That would definitely be a consideration. Honestly I’d mostly be trying to predict what my family members would do and do the same as them.
English
@WildGCTweets @waitbutwhy Feel like you’re fooling yourself. Instead, pretend there’s an opportunity to save one of your kids’ lives, but if you try to save them, there’s a 50/50 chance you die. You playing it safe or trying to save them?
English
54% of people are idiots who favour warm fuzzy self-righteous feelings over taking their responsibility to their dependents to survive seriously. I'm a father; I have to live to support my family, even if I have to live with the consequences. Risking your life for warm fuzzies you wouldn't even get to experience because you were dead to save idiots who wouldn't choose life over ego-driven smugness is insane, and just to avoid the guilt makes it selfish too.
English
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
@VizierQ @AriDavidPaul @realtimeai @uncatherio The assumption is you don’t have the opportunity to build consensus (nobody can impose their choice)… you’ve just gotta vote. You know billions will vote blue (including friends & family). So you can either vote to save those people, or to save yourself and let them die.
English
@Jobu_2 @AriDavidPaul @realtimeai @uncatherio The Blues aggressively imposed their choice on everyone, leading to the deaths of 4 billion people (including themselves), but somehow the Reds are to blame for this.
English
@darthvadertube @504Out @waitbutwhy I’m still not all the way convinced, but must be a feeler because I’m still baffled how many “thinkers” get to a place where they voted for billions of people dying (unnecessarily) *and* feel riteous about it. I get the self-preservation argument tho.
English
@504Out @waitbutwhy Red is for thinkers. Blue is for feelers.
English
@AriDavidPaul @realtimeai @uncatherio Interesting! If there’s time to build consensus, then yes try for 100% red. But if not, you (and others I like) are morally justifying voting for an outcome where likely ~3-4 billion die versus 0 dying. I can’t fathom voting that. I’m missing something (maybe philosophy lessons)
English
My tweet could’ve been better worded. Red is the objective right choice…for a set of assumptions about the scenario in the question. In the follow ups to that tweet, I explicitly explore those assumptions and how other assumptions could produce a different outcome. Took me a while to figure out my real point - that the militant blue pushers are a threat to society because they’ll quickly (often out of ignorance) coerce others to push blue out of a sense of righteousness. A mistaken red pusher is at worst calling people stupid. The gulags gets built by the blues for the reds.
English
@Jobu_2 @AriDavidPaul No it isn’t. It’s not moral to risk your own life to save others that are hell bent on destroying themselves.
English
@jareidz @CincinattusC @waitbutwhy You probably shouldn't vote based on an assumption you know is false
English
@CincinattusC @waitbutwhy If everyone thought my way, everyone would live
English