DustyBowl

297 posts

DustyBowl

@MrDustyBowl

France Katılım Ocak 2023

147 Takip Edilen12 Takipçiler

DustyBowl@MrDustyBowl·2h

But Anissa only applied the rules of her culture. She was raised this way, the strong takes according to viltrumite customs. Are you saying that some culture are worse than others? That's some fucked up racist shit dude. Leave my viltrumite immigrant alone. She crossed the entire galaxy to have a chance at life here.

English

2.5K

GMZ (FNF: VS Agumon OUT NOW)@GMZ_SUPER·16h

Who's the REAL villain? A scared and alone teen who wasn't ready for motherhood A rapist

Rock Solid@ShitpostRock2

English

261

4.9K

54.2K

628.3K

DustyBowl@MrDustyBowl·15h

@Teslimatttt For $12 I get Thadeus wearing the Tech Jacket to fight Thragg, and Anissa to repopulate Viltrum.

English

497

Teslimat@Teslimatttt·22h

You've got $12 to fight Thragg

English

1.4K

129

12K

3.7M

DustyBowl@MrDustyBowl·1d

Red button does nothing. Only blue has a direct action. Button A - You and everybody else who picked this button will die, except if >50% of the population press this button Button B - Nothing happens (remove Button B, and the dilemma of Button A still exists, you chose to play that stupid game hoping you won't win a stupid prize)

English

Adso Øvbelk@AdsoOfBelk·1d

Two buttons lie before you Button A - if you can get 50%+1 of people to agree with you, no one dies Button B - if you can get 100% of people to agree with you, no one dies

English

177

157

9.1K

216.6K

DustyBowl@MrDustyBowl·1d

@choffstein Here, look. The dilemma still exists, even without red. Red is a scapegoat.

English

1.1K

DustyBowl@MrDustyBowl·1d

Red button is not save yourself, red button does nothing. Red button exists only so blues can blame reds. Stop labeling reds as killers. Blue button kills blues. You might not like it, but this is what the choices actually are when you remove the weird phrasing of the original dilemma:

English

141

5.3K

Corey Hoffstein 🏴‍☠️@choffstein·1d

The red/blue button discourse today has made one thing very clear: framing matters. Case #1: Blue Button is labeled: "Save Everyone (if <50% people hit this button, you die)." Red Button is labeled: "Save yourself." Case #2: Blue Button is labeled: "Die (unless >50% of people hit this button)" Red Button is labeled: "Live" Case #3: Blue Button is labeled: "Pacifist" Red Button is labeled: "Killer (blue button pressers die if >50% people hit this button"

English

152

1.4K

125.8K

DustyBowl@MrDustyBowl·1d

Red is not a real button. The dilemma is phrased like it kills blues, but it doesn't. It does absolutely nothing. The blue button kills blues. Red button is a scapegoat so blues can blame reds if they fail to reach the objective they imposed on themselves. And they try to guilt trip others into doing the same mistake. Remove red, the blue dilemma still exists. Blues need 50% of people to press their button or they die. Imagine you're in a room with only the blue button, do you press it? Since you don't know if people will pick blue or not (50/50) it's akin to picking up a revolver with the chamber half filled and playing russian roulette. Just because you daydreamed a scenario in your head where you're a hero saving toddlers and colorblind people and whatever else I've seen blues invent to justify their action. When you're actually just gambling your life by ego thinking you're oh so morally superior. Don't press blue.

English

RandomPersonOnTheInternet@TheUnrustleable·1d

@AbeLopezAuthor This thought experiment is a midwit trap for people who think they understand game theory and people who actually understand game theory. There is no argument for pressing red that does not also apply for blue except self-preservation at the cost of other people's lives.

English

197

Abe Lopez, Author@AbeLopezAuthor·1d

Rational people know intrinsically that everyone should press red, it eliminates any question of anyone dying Irrational (emotionally-driven) people will be compelled to press blue because “it’s the right thing to do” And the more you try to convince them otherwise the more they’ll dig in

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

228

367

19.8K

DustyBowl@MrDustyBowl·1d

Answer this: "Why would billions risk their life by pressing blue?" You didn't "let billions die". They condemned themselves when pressing blue. Take responsibility for your actions goddamnit. You pressed the fucking blue button, you deal with the consequences. My button didn't say "press it and a blue player dies". It said "press it and nothing happens". Your button on the other hand said "You are perfectly safe right now but if you press this button you might die if less than 50% of the population doesn't press it too". Red isn't even a real choice. Remove the red button and the blue button dilemma still exists.

English

haruko 🏙️🏗️🪐@TwinkRegimer·1d

"Just press red it's the only way to guarantee your life" I'd rather die than let billions die to guarantee my own life.

English

169

2.6K

20.8K

DustyBowl@MrDustyBowl·1d

Red is not a choice. Stop blaming red omg. You are safe. Vote starts, still safe. Press red, go back to your life safely. Why the fuck would anybody press blue? Let's make it simple for people a bit too slow. Let's remove the red button. Now what? If you had a single blue button and the choice was: -Press the blue button and gamble your life in the hope 50% of the population will take this massive risk too for absolutely no reason -Don't press the button and don't die Red exists only so blue can reports the failure of their decision on red if they cannot reach 50%. That's all it is. Red is a scapegoat. Red does nothing. It's like if you never even pressed a button. This has nothing to do with high IQ or any other bullshit people try to philosophy about. This whole thing is only about the blue button and who is stupid enough to press it. The red button could not exist and the dilemma still remains. Red is a lie for the sake of the dilemma. Just don't fucking press blue...

English

125

3.6K

I,Hypocrite@lporiginalg·1d

You have to admit this is a hilarious tweet. Blue has won and everyone lives but all the red pressers are coping about their high IQs or whatever while having to love the rest of their lives knowing they would cowardly condemn their fellow man to death to save their own skin.

Tim Urban@waitbutwhy

English

972

491

9.7K

432.7K

DustyBowl@MrDustyBowl·1d

This makes sense if red was a real choice. Red isn't a choice, it's a decoy. Remove red, the entire dilemma still exists: blues need 50% of people to press their button. So if I put you in a room with a blue button and the choice is press it and risk dying, or don't and live. Who will be crazy/suicidal enough to press it? It's not because red requires an action that it becomes fundamentally different: it's a non action, it's like going on with your life and not participating to this whole thing. The only real button having a real action is the blue button. Pressing blue puts your life at risk by gambling your life and hope enough people will take this massive useless risk like you. Pressing red.... Well does nothing as a said. Red button exists only so people who would press blue can report the blame of their own (stupid) action if it fails. But the red button doesn't transform magically into "the button that only evil people press and if you press it you have blood on your hands". This is stupid. Red = non-action. This doesn't kill blue players, pressing the blue button kills blue players. Before knowing about this dilemma you were safe, when the dilemma started you were safe. Do you know when your life started to be at risk? When you pressed the blue button. Pressing red is literally staying safe, not by egoism but because it's the logical continuity your life before the existence of the dilemma. Everytime you cross a bridge, you won't jump and risk dying just in case someone already jumped before you and needs help? Why do it here by pressing the blue button? That makes zero sense.

English

3.5K

Jan Kulveit@jankulveit·1d

Funny little illustration of levels of understanding of game theory and rationality, or: why basic game theory is evil 1. Non-sociopaths going by intuition: blue sounds pro-social, blue 2. People who reason explicitly and use some naive game theory or naive rationality: red! 3. People who actually understand game theory: blue (if you want an explicit reason, because of trembling hand, Schelling points, theory of mind) A simple explanation of "why 3." is ...imagine you are forced to play the game tens of thousand of times, at random points of your life from birth to death. What strategy you want to play? "1." being in agreement with "3." often makes sense if you think about the origins of "1.". Unfortunately there are few pieces of knowledge which in expectation makes you more dumb and more evil if you don't progress beyond the basic level; some of the more prominent I know about are basics of game theory, especially prisoners dilemma; basic econ; Elephant in the brain

vittorio@IterIntellectus

why would anyone even press blue?!?

English

158

752

143.8K

DustyBowl@MrDustyBowl·1d

No, he is right. Remove the red button and the dilemma still exists. Blue button requires 50% of the population to press it or they die. You could press nothing, red, purple, green. It doesn't matter. Blue people will still die if not enough people pressed their button. Red is a decoy to give the illusion of choice and blame people who pressed read instead of blue (the word "instead" is important here). The real choice is: -Press blue and risk your life -Don't risk your life (press red, do nothing, etc...) It's not about "saving" anybody because nobody was in danger before someone pressed the blue button. But if you jump from a bridge you can't blame anybody, so why would you when pressing the blue button?

English

J🇺🇸@the_fem_tm·2d

@runarorama Not really. The question intentionally ties your decision to the outcomes of others. It seems pressing red will get you around that, but only if you are incapable of understanding how others behave, whether you think they’re stupid or not.

English

1.1K

J🇺🇸@the_fem_tm·2d

The framing of this question almost ensures lots of people will press blue, which is something you’d want to take into account if you’re being “rational” and thinking it all the way through, and thus makes red a less obvious choice than people are suggesting. It should matter to your own decision making that other people are “stupid and/or emotional” and will press blue. Based on the poll, enough them either are or understand this well enough that it will effect the outcome. If you phrased it as “you can press red and live, and everyone else can also press red and live OR you can press blue and you’ll only live if enough other people also press it, otherwise everyone who presses blue will die” then it becomes more obvious. I realize that’s the point of these questions, basically “do you understand game theory” but a lot of people don’t which is in itself part of the equation if you were really faced with this problem.

Tim Urban@waitbutwhy

English

277

12.7K

DustyBowl@MrDustyBowl·1d

But red button is not a real button. Think about it. Remove the red button. The dilemma doesn't change at all. Pressing blue still puts you in a position where you need 50% of the population to press it or you die. If you are in front of a single blue button and they tell you what it does, do you press it? Please tell me you don't. The only reason the red button exists is so blues can blame reds because not enough people pressed their button. But remove the red button and the problem still exists. Now they will blame you for not choosing their button and condemning them. When the real problem is people pressing the blue button at all.

English

Strawbærry Narwhal ‽↙↙↙@unvarnishedvoid·2d

@MrDustyBowl red isnt neutral because logically there will be people that pick blue. you dont understand anything about humans if you think that 100% of people will pick red. this is not a suicide scenario its one asking if you would save people.

English

213

3.1K

Strawbærry Narwhal ‽↙↙↙@unvarnishedvoid·2d

Imma put my 2 cents in With how this is worded red kills people. There is 0 realistic scenario where 0 people pick blue. So you are executing people. You pick red the blue deaths are more on you. That's why people pick blue I know that more then 50% of people will pick blue

Robb Allen@ItsRobbAllen

New Trolley problem has arrived, only it's dumber. Pres Red - 100% chance of living. Blue - Non-zero chance of dying. It has nothing to do with empathy for others unless you're stuck on suicidal empathy, which is YOUR fault, not mine. There is ZERO logical reason for ANYONE to press blue. NONE.

English

328

108

2.8K

58.3K

DustyBowl@MrDustyBowl·1d

I choose red because it accomplishes nothing. Remove the red button and the blues are still stuck in their suicidal dilemma. They need 50% of the population to gamble their life like they did, red button or not. Red button is a decoy, blue button is the only one that actually does something. Reformulate the dilemma in your head and you very quickly understand that red button is the only logical choice because it does nothing at all. The whole experiment is about blues, not reds. Blue makes you risk your life in the hope enough people risk their life the same way when nobody was in any kind of danger. You might think reds are evil, but you can't do worse than blues trying to guilt trip you into make the same mistake they do.

English

plasma ۞@plasmarob·2d

Lots of "i choose blue but i understand reds" Lots of "i choose red, fuck the blues"

English

109

1.9K

28.4K

DustyBowl@MrDustyBowl·1d

This is absolutely not how I see it as a red button pusher. I just see the red button as a fake button. The button literally does nothing. The dilemma could have a single button: the blue one. And some people would still be stupid enough to press it. Pressing blue just puts a rope around your neck, and the only way to remove it is to hope 50% of the population are ready to press the same button and put the same rope around their neck. No need for a red button at all. Even with just this choice I'm sure some people would be stupid enough to press it. It feels so weird to see "red button pressers" argue like the red button does anything at all when it's clearly a decoy. The whole dilemma is around the blue button only.

English

314

Loopy@strangestloop·2d

Tim Urban@waitbutwhy

ZXX

818

46.7K

DustyBowl@MrDustyBowl·1d

You understood the dilemma wrong. It's actually the opposite. Red button doesn't exist. Let me explain. Think of the situation. You are there right now, you haven't read that dilemma yet, you're not suicidal, you're not about to die. This is the vast majority of the population. Now you just read that dilemma and have to vote. Blue button is not yet pressed. Why would you press the blue button? Pressing the red button means you go back to where you were in your life, nothing changed, you can keep going normally. It's like the vote never happened. But because a bunch of people want to press the blue button, now it becomes the "kill plenty of people and become evil" button. The truth is the red button is an illusion, it's not a real button. You press it nothing happens. The only real button is blue, and when you press it you have to hope at least 50% of the population presses it too or you die. This is the only real thing about this whole dilemma. Now think about the percentage too, why 50%? Why not 25% or 75% Red button doesn't care about any percentage, because it's not a real choice. But you know some blue-button pushers will change their mind according to the goal they have to reach. This makes zero sense. Some will gamble their life for 25%, some for 50% some for 75%, hell I'm sure there are some crazies ready to gamble trying to reach 95%. Don't press the blue button, it's literally the only button in this game. And the only thing it does is make you gamble your life.

English

autumn@adrusi·2d

if the red party wins, theyll kill everyone who voted for the blue party the blue party wont kill anyone who are you voting for?

English

203

542

72K

DustyBowl@MrDustyBowl·2d

It's not about trust. Imagine this: The entire world population is on a platform. Press red you go back to your life like nothing happened. Press blue you fall into a giant shredder. But if enough people fall in (>50%) then the shredder doesn't activate and you go back to you life. WHO THE FUCK WOULD PRESS THE BLUE BUTTON???? Especially the first. Like wtf do they say once down there? "Come on guys, commit suicide too. If we are enough, we'll go back home haha." Yeah fuck that. I press red everyday. If you press blue you are: -suicidal -trying to guilt trip everybody (at least 49% of the population trying to save them) into suicide with them

English

174

Kekius Maximus@Kekius_Sage·2d

this is what it really is red: you don’t trust people, so you guarantee a worse world blue: you trust people, with zero control if they betray you if blue wins, you survived a gamble if red wins, you proved why trust never stood a chance either way: the outcome says more about us than the game itself

English

377

632

35.6K

DustyBowl@MrDustyBowl·2d

@iambrodyhess @redtachyon Red is the status quo. It's literally where you were before this question was asked. It's like a door you have to push to keep going with your life. If people choose the door clearly labeled "CAREFUL YOU MIGHT DIE IF YOU GO THROUGH IT" that's their fault and only their fault.

English

184

Brody Hess@iambrodyhess·2d

@redtachyon No one dies WHEN blue wins If people are selecting red they are forgetting things like cooperation that have built society and are instead still running around scared for their lives

English

1.2K

Ariel@redtachyon·2d

If you choose blue and die, there's only one person whose decision could have kept you alive.

English

2.1K

32.3K

DustyBowl@MrDustyBowl·2d

It's different, but people are too fucking dumb and keep adding shit like "hrrrm but what toddlers? Hrrrm but what about colorblind?" NOBODY SAID SHIT ABOUT THE TROLLEY PROBLEM AND PEOPLE WITHOUT ARM. GUESS WHY YOU MORONS. People go on a shit ton of exceptional situations when the question is really simple. It's not about colorblind or toddlers, it's about pressing the red button and going on with your life (maintaining the status quo from 2min ago) or commiting suicide for no reason.

English

898

Devon Eriksen@Devon_Eriksen_·2d

You are offered a pill. Anyone who takes the pill, dies, unless over 50% of humanity takes the pill. Obviously, you cannot be affected by the pill if you don't take it. Is the same moral scenario as the red and blue buttons?

English

421

559

92.8K

DustyBowl@MrDustyBowl·2d

Ok but what if the buttons are on a table and toddlers can't reach it? We can go forever like this... The truth is: blue button = gamble your life for no reason. The real question is: if the red button was pressed by default for everybody, would you be the first one to press the blue button and force everybody into a guilt trip. The red button is the norm. The first one who press the blue button creates the dilemma that shouldn't even exist in the first place.

English

130

Fletcher Dunn@ZPostFacto·2d

In this hypothetical, does "everyone in the world" include toddlers? Suddenly the blue pushers dont seem so dumb. Are toddlers the only examples of human lives that have worth, but are incapable of solving game theory problems?

Tim Urban@waitbutwhy

English

232

566

90.5K

DustyBowl@MrDustyBowl·2d

@questionableway Red is just "I don't want to die" Blue is "For fuck sake some idiots actually pressed that goddamn button so now I have to gamble my life" Press red

English

527

just matt@questionableway·2d

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

Tim Urban@waitbutwhy

English

1.2K

152

7.7K

1.1M

Keşfet

@Teslimatttt @choffstein @AbeLopezAuthor @runarorama @elonmusk @BarackObama @taylorswift13 @cristiano