@NathanpmYoung @FilippoAlimonda Isn’t it technically better if they stick to what’s easiest to prove (certified winner); why do you need them to recite a stronger claim that they don’t have any special access to evidence for or against?
English
mfweof
1.8K posts
@FilippoAlimonda Do you think it’s an important and basic fact that members of an impartial judiciary should be able to give.
English
@dead_baseball @JohnSmithesfug @khemist47 How many times have you risked life at 50% for strangers? Plenty of opportunities it seems
English
@JohnSmithesfug @khemist47 People will go into dangerous situations to save a life. Rushing into a burning building to get someone out... Jumping into the ocean to save someone drowning. Many times the chance of death is over 50% but they still do it.
In this situation, you can save half the world...
English
Again, not making a "red is right" or "blue is right" post, but just adding something to the thought experiment.
Let's say the vote is tied. Half the world voted red and half voted blue. You have the only remaining vote... which one do you press (this one is obv blue)? (cont.)
English
@TheCartoonLoon @MichaelAscendin If your kid dies from pressing blue so would you; your blue press is equivalent to pact suicide. Thing is, suicide is still available if you press red, but you get to find out if your kid actually died before you have to.
English
@MichaelAscendin And if your kid didn't choose red? Is you kid 1 years old? A new born? Or 12?
This is important
As no matter what there is at least a few thousand babies dying after this
English
If rather my kid have a chance at living than myself living and him dying
I don't really understand why people don't get this.
Its literally built into being a parent
English
@burgahmeister @jmbollenbacher Blue pushers are tested every single day. At any time they could walk out into oncoming traffic, and if enough of them did it, they’d be fine.
English
@jmbollenbacher Keep in mind this is blue pushers who aren’t actually tested. Blue pushers will never know if they would actually push blue unless they are put in a real life/death scenario of the button question. Until then, it takes zero effort to be a blue pusher
English
On any given question, red-pressures are more inclined to pick the morally degenerate option:
Are you honest? No.
Do you cheat? Yes.
Do you have empathy? No.
David Shor@davidshor
To close out red/blue button discourse, we polled ~14k people and crosstabbed survey responses by 204 commonly used psychometric questions. The top four personality questions most predictive of button choice are displayed below
English
@jmbollenbacher @Drowlord101 You are exactly the person who needs to press blue
English
@Drowlord101 I didnt say red pressers are nazis.
I said that it's common consensus that when one group of people is trying to kill everyone else for their own benefit, the common consensus is that it's justified to fight back.
English
@jmbollenbacher @ArcanesValor If someone says they’re dishonest, that’s at least an honest answer. If someone says they’re honest, you have learned nothing
English
@ArcanesValor And it is precisely that theory of mind failure which makes you want to press red.
You'd save your own skin and pretend you didnt, so why wouldnt everyone?
You can't imaging that others arent secretly cowards and liars too.
English
@tenobrus @blingdivinity one vote has ~no impact, all the votes cause the outcomes. Proof by contradiction: if my vote counted, yours wouldn’t
English
@blingdivinity this only makes sense if you incorrectly model voting as *having no impact*. in fact the votes cause the outcomes! blue voters do not know for sure that they will win, they are taking on risk. after the fact, sure, they were right in retrospect!
English
if blue wins, an intelligent blue voter (with accurate estimation of voting percentages) was never really risking anything. if red wins, a blue voter couldn't have chosen blue intelligently. you cant be both altrustic and intelligent in this scenario
Tenobrus@tenobrus
sorry chud, blue wins again
English
@_failedsociety @lporiginalg Depends how much better odds, do you think she should jump off a skyscraper to superman catch 3 of her 5 kids, or stay behind for the other 2 who didn’t jump?
English
@lporiginalg "Nothing happens" is the biggest tell. The high IQers seemingly have no capacity for second or third order thinking.
Simple question: Would a loving mother of 5 risk her own life to give all her children better odds of surviving?
English
Hate to break it to you, but the midwit position is framing a moral conundrum as an IQ test.
MentisWave 🐍🚁@MentisWave
TL;DR:
English
@MattLutzPhi Means if you press blue you both die. So if you prefer that, press red, wait to see what your kid pressed. If your kid pressed blue, you can now kill yourself and you get the same outcome. But if your kid pressed red too, you both live.
English
I see a lot of people saying that the blue button is collectivist nonsense. But if you press red, your kid dies.
You're safe, though. You got that calculated out right.
English
English
@RealNorthEndGuy @andrew_koenig reds need 100% coordination to not be killing. that’s further from the data from any blue dude
English
the chance of you effecting the vote is not zero. you have to multiply a small number by a large number -- the EV malus of it happening.
it actually scales sqrt (n), re aaronson. since the malus is n/2 lives, ev maxxing picks blue
to do otherwise is pascal's shrugging
English
@karateclub90000 @IcekinQC @midiconch @Gravantus You’d do that if you saw 999 people before you all take one box and get $1M each? And only one guy get $0?
English
@IcekinQC @midiconch @Gravantus I can take B and get 0 but in that case both me and predictor lose, so i would rather get 1k over getting a meaningless victory over him
English
I don't understand this scenario. How many boxes are there? Why am I taking boxes? Who is Omega?
Regardless though, if the Sonic character is that good at predicting, I guess I'd probably end up taking as many as it predicted?
I don't understand the mental puzzle of this.
Bachman@ElonBachman
Newcomb's Paradox is the Breakfast Question for rationalists
English
@panickssery @hlntnr How about this model
E[Red] = 1
E[Blue] = 1-P(Red) + P(Tie) * r * 4.1 billion
where the unit is the how much you value your life and r is how much you value others’ lives (assuming you value all equally).
Helen is right because others’ behavior determines these probabilities.
English
Been trying to stay out of the Button Discourse, but-
Your decision should depend on what other people actually choose, which is blue by well over 50%.
Lord of the Flies is not an accurate depiction of human behavior. "Rational" ≠ "selfish." If this poll surprised you, update.
David Shor@davidshor
We asked this to a large sample of nationally representative Americans - blue wins by a 3:1 margin!
English
it's the red pressers who don't know game theory, not the blue pressers
the global optimum does *not* follow by optimizing individually. cf prisoner's dilemma
C. Aaron Rodgers@CAaronRodgerus
If you know ahead of time that 51% percent of people are going to press red, then you can save one additional life by also pressing red yourself. If you know ahead of time that 51% of people are going to press blue, then it doesn't matter what you press. You and everyone else are going to live anyways. Sociologists claim it's safe to press blue, because historically this poll usually is won by blue. This claim is of course deeply stupid. In a consequence-free hypothetical, the most advantageous course of action to is to select (and then loudly declare/argue over) whichever choice allows you to advertise to others what a magnanimous and trusting person you are.
English
@LinchZhang @waitbutwhy Your vote won’t determine the outcome, but will determine whether you’re on the chopping block
English
i don't really believe in the midwit meme normally but I think this quiz is a good example of the midwit meme, or at least multiple levels of thinking:
0. ppl who can't read pick randomly
1. dumb ppl who can read but too dumb to model or care about other ppl pick red
2. ppl with enough intelligence for basic cognitive empathy pick blue
3. ppl a little bit smarter and could think through the game theory overall pick red and think they're smart to do so
4. ppl smarter than 3 and capable of seeing the big picture and realizing that they don't want to leave ppl in #0 and #2 dead so they pick blue.
There might be more levels after that but #4 feels like a kinda robust equilibrium, with enough adherents.
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
@DaveShapi If more than 50% of people smoke, nobody gets cancer. Would you smoke?
English
I don't want to live on a planet where most people press red
WhickTV - Bane of Christian Nationalists@WhickTv
I'm a blue button pusher. Reasons in no necessary order: 1) Many people I love and care for will press blue. Me pressing blue has a chance of saving them, me pressing red does not 2) I would feel bad if I contributed, in however small a way, to the direct death of a non-zero number of people 3) I believe most people will, when it comes down to it, push blue. Pushing blue has the greatest chance of *everyone* surviving.
English
@PositivFuturist Likely you’re not about to swing the vote, so it’s better to press red; you retain the option of suicide if you end up changing your mind.
English
Best argument for blue is that he said "everyone in the world"
So assuming you don't get to prep your kids - a huge % of kids would die.
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
@GGarrett2000 @Di4mondD4y @ElonBachman @eigenrobot If I’m told about the rules and believe the premise then I’ll take box B only; if I don’t believe the premise then I’ll take both. So my choice hinges on how believable this seems when presented with the boxes; if it’s a street hustler’s good word, I’d two box
English
@Di4mondD4y @ElonBachman @eigenrobot Omega is either a perfect or near-perfect predictor (99%). Box A has $1000. Box B has $0 if Omega predicts you take both boxes, or $1,000,000 if Omega predicts you only take box B. You can take either B or both A and B. Omega has already made its prediction. How many do you take?
English
@Stragas_Lodge @ElonBachman isn’t the paradox gone if you imagine believing omega is 90% right? I never understood this, it just seems like the paradox is imprecise wording.
English
@ElonBachman The Newcomb's paradox is easier to understand if you don't make Omega omniscient, just very good in predicting.
Suppose Omega is the best psychologist in the world that specializes in profiling, and he can predict your choice with 90% accuracy. The paradox is still there.
English
@ElonBachman If I imagine believing Omega, I’d one box. If I imagine not believing Omega, I’d two box. Which scenario are you asking me to imagine?
English
