erroneous input

@Johnm1291 @ophello @HardwireMedia yes, it also has a 100% of having no effect at all. i’m going to bed

@erroneous_input @ophello @HardwireMedia I require no priors. 2 buttons one has a 100% of doing exactly what it says. I choose that one.

These red-button reframings only make their case look worse. Of course framing matters. People are programmed not to jump into wood chippers or in front of trains. But in the original Tim Urban framing, a ton of kids would pick blue because it sounds like the brave, obvious “save everyone” choice. They’re not thinking game theory. They’re thinking: help the group, do the right thing, stop the train. So choosing red in that framing is basically abandoning the people most likely to be fooled by the premise, including children. That’s why the framing matters. It can literally create different moral realities. Red voters are chalked.

@Johnm1291 @ophello @HardwireMedia i understand that you think your choice has an impact on if you live or die. i’m saying that you have to add priors to get there. if 100% of 1m scenarios end in a blue victory, your vote meant nothing.

@erroneous_input @ophello @HardwireMedia We seem to be going in circles now. Mt choice is mine. I believe the world won’t realistically reach 50% So I choose to not take the risk. Will people likely die Yes Tragic very sad But People die every second of every day

@Johnm1291 @ophello @HardwireMedia vote* effectively i’m with you. if we really all can make the choice and it’s about people making mistakes and others trying to correct that, fuck that noise that’s retarded.

@Johnm1291 @ophello @HardwireMedia we don’t even know if this question is truly even capable of being translated to these people. i’m not introducing these unknowns. if only literate westerners voted, i bot red every time.

@Johnm1291 @ophello @HardwireMedia again you chose your priors and thus the distribution

@erroneous_input @ophello @HardwireMedia To get 50% you need 2.89 times the population of India to vote blue. I’m not taking those odds. Vote red and be insulated from the retardation

@Johnm1291 @ophello @HardwireMedia no, i think that the mean IQ of india and africa are that of mentally retarded people

@erroneous_input @ophello @HardwireMedia So you believe that children and the mentally infirm and coma patients they claim are voting randomly exceeds 50% You sir are not the best at math.

@Johnm1291 @ophello @HardwireMedia i get where you’re coming from and i’m literally saying that there is no answer except your priors. you have to choose what the RNG algorithm is. when you do that, your choice is made for you.

@Johnm1291 @ophello @HardwireMedia no i get that and im saying the random noise in this case exceeds the population of actual choice. if there was an RNG that voted for every person except you, your vote has the ability to not matter. because that RNG could ALWAYS skew above blue 50%

@SithLordW22 @HardwireMedia stop smuggling priors

@erroneous_input @HardwireMedia and black is white, up is down, peanut butter is jelly - many such cases

@Johnm1291 @ophello @HardwireMedia red is not 100% odds because voting red has the ability to not matter

@erroneous_input @ophello @HardwireMedia Red is 100% odds. Blue is not. It’s that simple Blue is gambling Red is certain

@Johnm1291 @ophello @HardwireMedia but they introduced randomness. they didn’t opt to die. that was already chosen for them by someone who chose blue randomly. no one has agency in this game. it’s all noise.

@erroneous_input @ophello @HardwireMedia A vote red is a vote not to opt into death Blue is opting to die Sure there is a survival clause but that doesn’t mean they get to blame red voters like they have been doing

@Johnm1291 @ophello @HardwireMedia blue isn’t a gamble. red isn’t a gamble. there’s actually no gamble. that’s the problem with randomness. blue’s argument is as valid as red’s argument. but i choose red. because there’s no reason not to

@erroneous_input @ophello @HardwireMedia The problem is People want to “Win” Your vote is for your life Not everyone else. The reduction to my chosen side must win is meaningless Red is safe either way Blue is deciding to gamble with lives convinced they can “win” when that eas never be point

@Johnm1291 @ophello @HardwireMedia i mean it’s random given all arguments. there is no scenario in which you have information that changes the symmetry of the random effects. the only argument i have is that i like red voters more.

@Johnm1291 @ophello @HardwireMedia adding randomness makes this a game of priors. truly the choice is arbitrary. it’s arbitrary because it involves noise far greater than any signal. choosing red doesn’t save your life if blue always wins. choosing blue saves no one of red always wins. winning is random.

@LarenDorr @virologyanon @ophello @HardwireMedia it doesn’t matter what’s in your interest it’s what affect your vote can have on an outcome.

@virologyanon @ophello @HardwireMedia Okay so in your hypothetical scenario India and Africa vote red in an overwhelming majority, unlike naive westerners, thus being less affected by a red victory and better poised to exploit it. Sounds like blue winning is in your interest even if you're a racist

@HardwireMedia @Stockmaninoff @ophello god i hate you sophists

@Stockmaninoff @ophello How about when 50% are faced with destroying society and potentially losing loved ones?

@ophello @HardwireMedia it’s practically impossible for everyone on the planet to vote blue. so…. how unlikely? you’ve made up a probability with nothing a blue and red voter both have an outcome of 0 to .499 deaths. you’re saying that you know what the mean probability is based on fucking nothing.

@HardwireMedia It is practically impossible that everyone on the planet will vote red. Voting blue is the only way we can guarantee no one dies. This isn’t even a moral issue. It’s pure statistics.

@NfthmblStudios faggot

he's mad he only gets to choose between vanilla and murder and wants to avoid the burden of limited agency