@GTXTrainPower @currydtx No? Like.. words have meanings. If you just make shit up what words are supposed to mean, then one cannot hold a meaningful conversation with you. "Actively hurting" is not the same as inaction.
English
Rendern5000
2.3K posts
@rendern5000 @currydtx Bystander syndrome - Same way so many people don't act when they see something terrible happen. This is a self admission to calling yourself a malicious coward btw.
English
Blue is 100% the right choice. There is no reality where all 8 billion people pick red so you have to pick blue to prevent millions from dying.
MrBeast@MrBeast
Everyone on earth takes 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? BE HONEST.
English
@GTXTrainPower @currydtx You absolutely have the power, if you decided to cut back on your own non essential wants, to save a multitude of people. It is the same as with the button, but actually even easier, since you aren't even risking your own life.
English
@rendern5000 @currydtx In this case, we the people do not have as much power, as with the button. But if we did - Yes, absolutely, choosing not to provide for people, is killing them. If youre stranded on an island and hog the food you dont need, from others, letting them starve. YOU'RE the bad guy lol
English
@GTXTrainPower @currydtx Delusional. You can make the argument that society is not providing for everyone, without saying 'everyone, me included, is a murderer'.
If you really think so though, do try to sue yourself for murder in a court of law, by arguing this.
English
@rendern5000 @currydtx Yes, the answer is yes. Us as a society not dedicating resources is quietly literally textbook greed and hurting them actively lmfao.
English
@GTXTrainPower @currydtx Again, inaction, as the word implies, is not actually an action. It is not 'actively' hurting.
English
@rendern5000 @currydtx Both are actively hurting the chances of survival. You dont 'do nothing' by pressing red. You choose 'dont help my fellow man' which is actively hurting. Both analogies work fine lmao. Guilty by omission is still guilty bucko.
English
@GTXTrainPower @currydtx Just to really showcase the difference: Are you actively killing people in africa, by not choosing to do away with your own non-basic needs, and using that time and money to help them instead?
English
@GTXTrainPower @currydtx Not really, no. Setting fire = actively hurting. Not helping push the boat = not actively helping. There is a big difference.
Again, sabotaging is something you do actively; choosing not to pick the same side is not the same as sabotaging.
English
@J_D_Palma @esjesjesj Please educate yourself on game theory and statistics. I am saying I want to minimize the number of deaths. As in, keep the expected number of deaths as low as possible. That does not mean choosing an overall worse option because it has the potential to save more in a niche sit.
English
@rendern5000 @esjesjesj Bro, there's just no realm of existence where 100% of people pick either side. So in order to prevent ANY deaths, the "safer" pick is blue.
Especially when the "work" it takes to prevent death, is as easy as pressing a button. I think most people would press blue.
English
Red is the only button that can cause others to die. It’s that simple
Jaden Williams@JadenJTW
Which do you press? 🔵/🔴
English
@J_D_Palma @esjesjesj Game theory tells us, that to minimize human deaths, red is the rational choice.
English
@J_D_Palma @esjesjesj Game theory; We have N participants. M vote blue, so N-M vote red. The red votes each save themselves, saving 1 life per vote. The blue votes save M people under the condition that M>N/2. Which means 1 blue vote saves either 1 life or 0, depending on if the condition is met.
English
@GTXTrainPower @currydtx No, the red boat may not potentially set them on fire; the fact that there are not enough people to push the boat off the island would be the way to phrase that <50% means death for the blue boat.
Like.. where do you even get the "red sets fire to them" from?
English
@rendern5000 @currydtx Is this your actual take?
The real question would be more akin to, the blue boat being automatic, but needs 51% of the island to help push it off. But, the red boat may potentially set them on fire, and needs 100% of the island in complete unity to achieve the same result.
English
@Traffy23 @esjesjesj I am not arguing against working together. I am simply arguing that currently (not going to the capitalism debate) I do not think it is realistic that a blue victory is likely enough to change from red to blue.
English
@rendern5000 @esjesjesj We as a society have succeeded because of collectivism. It's only in the modern era that capitalism has pushed us to be more individualistic and desensitising to others.
English
@Traffy23 @esjesjesj And yet many cultures and countries do in fact cultivate even more selfish beliefs.
English
@rendern5000 @esjesjesj In America oh hell nah. The amount of religious zealots I've seen on here with loving Christian choosing red when Jesus would choose blue. But the world isn't America.
English
@reachcole1999 @DavidDazeX @EckhartAurelius @esjesjesj Sureeee. Pressing X to doubt so hard right now.
English
@rendern5000 @DavidDazeX @EckhartAurelius @esjesjesj I have done it, anyone with half a brain and a minutiae of dedication could. They are important and essential but far from irreplaceable.
English
@Traffy23 @esjesjesj You still have not at all understood what I tried to get across to you beforehand. Maybe let's try it like this; do you really think, with all the Trump supporters in the US, you would be able to more than likely secure a majority?
English
@rendern5000 @esjesjesj Yes 50% is easier than 100%. 50% is half. 100% is all. For an entire country that can be millions to a billion hitting the same button. Vs just over half hitting the other.
English
@reachcole1999 @DavidDazeX @EckhartAurelius @esjesjesj 🤣 good joke. Try it, and you will find out, that most people are not cut out for them. Including me. I KNOW I would not be able to do their job. Just like they likely couldn't do mine.
English
@rendern5000 @DavidDazeX @EckhartAurelius @esjesjesj Low skill jobs can be replaced by anyone, that's the meaning of a low skilled job.
English
@reachcole1999 @DavidDazeX @EckhartAurelius @esjesjesj Sure, then let's keep in mind that those are primarily from low education backgrounds and jobs, which means they are more often than not the handymen, riggers etc. which keep the economy running…
Or I could just insist on "can't know, unless I have actual data".
English
@rendern5000 @DavidDazeX @EckhartAurelius @esjesjesj Well we've established that you agree at the bare minimum that most anti-science individuals would be red button pushers so let's use that as a basis.
English
@reachcole1999 @DavidDazeX @EckhartAurelius @esjesjesj That's impossible to answer, since I do not know the demographics of red and blue button pushers. For example, if most people that keep modern civilization running pick red vs blue, makes a huge difference.
English
@rendern5000 @DavidDazeX @EckhartAurelius @esjesjesj Do you think the world in which only red button pushers remain would be better or worse?
English
English
@rendern5000 @DavidDazeX @EckhartAurelius @esjesjesj So because things are bad you're ok with them becoming worse?
English
@reachcole1999 @DavidDazeX @EckhartAurelius @esjesjesj Don't see how that differs much from the status-quo. I mean, that crowd already controls the white house 🤷♂️
English
@rendern5000 @DavidDazeX @EckhartAurelius @esjesjesj So presume your choice was the majority choice and maybe 30% of the population dies. What you're left with are some rational individuals and a horde of anti-science self serving mongrels.
English
@reachcole1999 @DavidDazeX @EckhartAurelius @esjesjesj I don't doubt that? Like… what has that got to do with it?
English
@rendern5000 @DavidDazeX @EckhartAurelius @esjesjesj I promise you that the majority of modern anti-science individuals are red button pushers.
English