Balkanoid

Even a Bandit Loves his Mother #art #digitalart #relatable #krita #sketch #rkgk #robbery #maskedman #NewYear2025

@toffee_32 Usually it’s erroneously applied to people (protestants) who try using their religion to justify or spread crappy beliefs

I dislike how people use the term "religious psychosis" so freely bc not only it takes away from what "psychosis" actually is but in general these people use it in situations where there're bigger similarities to religious manipulation or abuse which is what happens more often

@DrFisura @SlavicWalrus @DFO627 you have an anime child porn addiction and you’re telling other people they won’t inherit the Kingdom of God?

@SlavicWalrus @DFO627 Do you agree with this? Lolicon is not pedophilia and false accusers do not inherit the kingdom of God

The AI child porn stops here nigga

@baldynosehair24 @HuntManLiberty @tufpraise largely incorrect

@HuntManLiberty @tufpraise hitler was indeed a Christian, yes

Just imagine how dark and satanic those files must be that they had to start an actual war just to distract people to bury them.

@_Hazardous_Wolf Somebody blocked me over an absurd twitter hypothetical, wow

@_Hazardous_Wolf The question is paradoxical because picking red also creates the blue risk. Picking red guarantees survival but if enough people pick red at most 49% of the population will die. It is significantly easier to get 50+% to pick blue than for 100% to pick red so I’d pick blue.

Huh, wasn't expecting this post to get as much traction as it did. I think it's important to point out that regardless of blue always getting the majority in these polls, red can never "lose" regardless of how the vote goes. In my opinion however, what this poll really demonstrates is how democracy breeds authoritarianism via collectivist ideologies that leverage the altruistic tendencies of people by goading them into ignoring basic logic and reason in favor of emotion and the collective to "survive", which is ultimately used to justify the erosion and removal of individual rights and freedoms.

@_Hazardous_Wolf @irishScott2 yeah atp the blues are willingly joining the ethical dilemma and then getting mad at you for not saving them

@UnreactiveE @irishScott2 But what I'm saying is, the people who voted blue would still accuse the people choosing to abstain as being "accessories to murder", the same as voting red, because they didn't pick their side, and despite voting being completely optional in this modified scenario.

@_Hazardous_Wolf @irishScott2 If we would only tally the red and blue button presses (and ignore the percentage that didn’t vote) then no, abstaining is not the same as voting red

@UnreactiveE @irishScott2 The conditions would all be the same, but the only difference in the hypothetical would be you'd have the option to not vote at all.

@_Hazardous_Wolf @irishScott2 It depends, would not participating count against the blue voters? Like if 10% votes red, 60% doesn’t vote, and 30% votes blue, does blue die?

@UnreactiveE @irishScott2 Yes, but what I'm getting at is the people who still decide to choose blue in that scenario, despite it being completely optional and voluntary, would equate abstaining from voting as being the same thing as voting for red.

@_Hazardous_Wolf @irishScott2 If there was an option to not participate the that would be the correct choice. If you choose to enter the dilemma then that’s on you. Anybody arguing otherwise is just retarded ( assuming only adults could vote ) plus nobody would be alive to complain anyway

@irishScott2 @UnreactiveE If we're working within the confines of the hypothetical, abstaining from voting isn't an option, but assuming you had a choice to not vote and didn't, there would still be people calling you a murderer for not picking blue.

@HalfWolfMukirr @irishScott2 @_Hazardous_Wolf If a politician campaigned on killing everyone who didn’t vote for him then would you vote for him?

@irishScott2 @_Hazardous_Wolf @UnreactiveE Picking red actually doesn't kill anyone.

@realDareGames @AUsername360 @_Hazardous_Wolf Would you agree that the best possible scenario is most people picking blue

@AUsername360 @_Hazardous_Wolf @UnreactiveE The conditional for death is placed on the percentage that vote blue, therefore blue is the risk. Hence why blue people are the ones that kill themselves.

@realDareGames @AUsername360 @_Hazardous_Wolf if you cut off access to the red button there is also no danger

@AUsername360 @UnreactiveE @_Hazardous_Wolf If I cut off access to the blue button, there is no danger.

@ErikBecklin @_Hazardous_Wolf It has come to my attention that votes are private and cannot be coordinated per the prompt so this arguments is not applicable. But I disagree and think campaigning around blue is probably easier than red. But if you knew most people were picking red then blue is retarded

The thing about coordinating around red is that it seems inherently more stable. A good campaign for red might push the red intention to 95% or above and then it can be expected to stay there. A good campaign for blue might push the blue intention to, say, 75%. But then people will keep wondering, “maybe when push comes to shove lots of people will push red, after all?” And then that might make them pick red themselves and then blue loses with a catastrophic 49%…

@AUsername360 @realDareGames @_Hazardous_Wolf technically the idea that blues are electing the chance to die is true but their motivation is not unfounded while red is taking the safest option (for them) which is valid but just lame in a moral sense

@realDareGames @_Hazardous_Wolf @UnreactiveE The button that kills is the red one. That is what the label on the red button says. The button could kill blues 100% of the time and it would not diminish red's culpability. You press the red button to protect yourself from the red button. The blue button says everyone lives

@KatraApplesauce @_Hazardous_Wolf yeah this is essentially my argument. The literal best possible option is very likely to occur but is only possible if you take the risk and choose blue.

@_Hazardous_Wolf @UnreactiveE if 51% of people press blue, everyone is fine if 51% of people press red, civilization ends you need over 90% to press red which is delusional to assume would happen

@the_lemoe_ @_Hazardous_Wolf If that’s the case picking red is psychotic

@UnreactiveE @_Hazardous_Wolf The question states "everyone on earth", I think it's pretty clear that would include children, anyone in a coma, etc.

@ErikBecklin @_Hazardous_Wolf If you can coordinate like several days or weeks in advance for everyone in the world to vote red then sure, but you could also coordinate at least half of the world into voting blue which is easier to do. If the trend is that everyone is going to vote red then I’ll vote red

@UnreactiveE @_Hazardous_Wolf Yeah, 100% red is maybe more unlikely than 50% blue, but I think that 90-95% red is more likely than 50% blue. Especially if you can coordinate. Also, if people try to get to 50% blue but fall just short, that is clearly the most catastrophic scenario.

@_Hazardous_Wolf Sure but in this hypothetical it is extremely easy and statistically likely to save everybody so I don’t agree with the logic in not choosing blue because of game theory and purely self preservation

@UnreactiveE Honestly speaking, that's just not reality. You can't save everyone from themselves, but you can choose to save yourself, that is the cost of freedom.

@the_lemoe_ @_Hazardous_Wolf I think most reds assume the pressing population is adults, otherwise blue is common sense

@_Hazardous_Wolf @UnreactiveE >I also value human life Do you value the lives of human children? They're part of this scenario too, and they aren't exactly a group known for their astouning logical reasoning skills.

@DiceWolf25 @_Hazardous_Wolf The situation in the graphic is an obvious oversimplification. Pretending like my argument makes absolutely no sense whatsoever is a result of intellectual dishonesty. My point is that the most likely outcome that results in no death is a blue victory.

@UnreactiveE @_Hazardous_Wolf There is no reason at all to push blue. "To ensure nobody dies" They chose to push blue. They didn't have to. They chose to. This is an IQ test and the dumbest morons on earth hit blue. Nobody has to push blue. The OP pic perfectly represents it. Just move out of the crusher

@_Hazardous_Wolf I try to value the lives of strangers as much as my own. Though, my point being mainly moral, the option that results in any amount of human life ending is most people picking red, so I won’t contribute to it. I do believe humanity can act as a collective, but not in totality.

I also value human life, which is why I would press the red button to preserve my own, and in my opinion, anyone else that does should do the same and encourage those they care about to do so as well. That's not an unreasonable conclusion to come to, nor does it lack empathy. What it doesn't do is treat humanity as a collective however, because simply put, we aren't.