The red button blue button hypothetical is the stupidest shit ever, dude. There's a button that kills you and a button that doesn't, if you press the former there's a chance it misfires depending on how other people picked. You are a bad person for picking the latter, for some reason.

@AppleAmps well the red button risks the lives of potentially like half the entire world population, the blue button only risks your own life. (collectively it risks everyone’s life, But by doing so no one dies if >50% of people hit the blue button, which from all polling i’ve seen would be the outcome)

@FawnOverFun
Ok first off the polling for this is flawed because, like, obviously everyone's gonna pick blue in a social media poll. If you put a gun to people's head and told them to pick a button that might kill you or a button that won't the results are gonna be like 10/90.

Also, picking red is only risking 50% of the population if I seriously believe 50% of humanity would choose to put their life at risk for literally no reason, which I don't.

@FawnOverFun
Also in polls where the answer is framed without that kind of #teamred or #teamblue social dynamics, like, say, changing the red button to simply be "doing nothing" the margins literally *are* 10/90.

@AppleAmps I’m pressing the one that turns me into a girl

@AppleAmps idk it’s less of a “you live or you might die” in my head, and more of a “you live but you kill people or everyone lives” typa situation

@shroomie
Ok but a) you don't kill people and b) the odds that everyone lives are actually pretty slim!

@shroomie
If you live after pressing red that doesn't come at the cost of someone who pressed blue. They chose to press blue when they could've just pressed red and lived.

Like, a good reframing for me is this: you and a group of other people are standing in front of some train tracks and the train is passing soon, there is no one tied to the tracks or actively at risk of dying, if enough people jump at the same time the train stops and kills no one, if only some people choose to jump they die. Is not jumping here morally equivalent to killing someone?

@AppleAmps yes because not jumping means that half your group has to die? terrible metaphor honestly, people dying is an implicit part of voting red

@shroomie
No! Half your group doesn't have to die because no one *has* to jump in front of the train!

Why is it an implicit part of picking red? If everyone picked the button that lets you live no one dies!

@AppleAmps like i literally just made this diagram

EDIT: okay imagine the diagram but with both players choosing read reading “everyone lives.” with this new assumption, it does not matter who votes what as assuming someone else votes something else, somebody is going to die no matter what. red, i guess, is the smarter choice?

@shroomie
Why are you assuming that so many people will choose blue when choosing red is inherently better for them?

@AppleAmps shit i got the math wrong fuck

@shroomie
In what way did you get the math wrong here, though? Like, in the diagram if you choose red and everyone else chooses red literally no one dies.

@shroomie
That's the point of the train analogy, if no one flings themselves into mortal peril for no reason no one dies.

@AppleAmps i edited the post, see it again

@AppleAmps with the train analogy it’s choosing to push the people onto the tracks who do not side with you.

@AppleAmps WAT FUCk THERES MORe

@AppleAmps fedi is a terrible place to have this discussion. anyways, if you choose red and don’t want anybody to die, you are hoping that nobody chooses blue. if you vote blue and don’t want anybody to die, you are just hoping that less people voted red than blue

@shroomie
No! Why?

@AppleAmps sorry im discombobulated we had our carpet and glass cleaned i think the fumes are getting to my head

@shroomie
Ok, but if for every individual it makes more sense to pick red why wouldn't everyone pick it? If it has a 100% chance to save you and a 100% chance to save everyone if all other people vote rationally with their life on the line, why would you pick blue?

@shroomie
You can choose to save yourself or maybe possibly save people who are choosing to risk their lives when they could just save themselves, frankly the former makes more sense.

@AppleAmps i personally would rather risk death than risk killing someone

@shroomie
But you're not killing someone!! Choosing not to dive in front of the train is not the same as pushing someone in!

@shroomie
Also you doing that is what makes death more likely overall, you get that right? The only reason people have to press blue, therefore bringing the possibility of death into the scenario, is because you can't trust other people to simply not press the button that might kill them.

@shroomie
The train analogy is entirely logically equivalent, pressing red isn't "pushing someone into the tracks" because it's a non-action, you're choosing to have nothing happen to you and to do nothing to anyone else. If you choose to not jump in front of the train that's one less person that can save all the schmucks who DO jump, but you're not culpable for the death of people who chose to put themselves in harm's way for, again, no reason.

@AppleAmps i mean maybe but by pushing the blue button i’m making it more likely that nobody can die, whereas by pushing the red button i’m making it more likely that somebody can die

@AppleAmps you’re forgetting that blue stops the train

@AppleAmps and out of 8 billion or so people, somebody is inevitably going to press blue

@shroomie
I'm not forgetting, if enough people jump in front that saves everyone who does, you are still not responsible if you don't jump.

@AppleAmps idk i think that not helping stop the train is guilt by proxy

@shroomie
Ok, but, frankly, why put your life on the line to have such a low chance of saving someone who values theirs so little? Blue only saves anyone if more than fifty percent presses it, if your thinking is that "someone" will, unless you're sure that "someone" is 4 billion minus 1 people you're just adding to the bodycount at that point.

@AppleAmps i am not calling you a murderer or egocentrist for preferring red btw

@shroomie
But you don't know if anyone is gonna jump, though, the voting is blind, you're not "helping stop the train" as much as you are assuming people will try to kill themselves.

@AppleAmps i mean. you don’t truly know what’s inside the hearts of every man, and neither do i. i’m betting that more than 50% of people are going to go for the option that risks their death if they make the “wrong” choice, but guarantees the life of their loved ones (at the very least), and you’re betting that everyone is just going to choose for themselves

@AppleAmps @shroomie about a quarter of the world population has an iq below 90 and many are small children / elderly people with dementia. The presumption is that there's a large enough chunk of society that won't be able to fully understand or logic out that if everyone presses red nobody dies, basically whatever happens many of these people are pressing blue, the hope is that enough people are motivated to stop these people dying by also pressing blue.

@FiringSquadsEnjoyer @AppleAmps actually actually solid logic compared to my “people would press blue to save a loved one” hypothesis. probably better tbh

@shroomie @AppleAmps tbh some people I've seen on here have made a very malthusian argument that all the elderly + low iq people in society dying would be a good thing and it's their own fault anyway for pressing the button

@FiringSquadsEnjoyer @AppleAmps good god that’s just eugenics what the fuck???

@FiringSquadsEnjoyer @shroomie
Ok, see, I think this argument does have merit, yeah. Most discussions I've seen have kinda just used the assumption that everyone is beamed understanding of the scenario regardless of prior condition and/or that within the thought experiment everyone is a rational actor but if when choosing you can be reasonably sure that there's gonna be a baby somewhere presented with two colors and no context it does make more sense to risk dying.

@FiringSquadsEnjoyer @shroomie
Mind you I still think that even within that scenario pressing red is justified because you can't know what everyone else will choose and applying moral weight to not putting your life in mortal peril on the chance it might save someone else is kinda Mark Wahlberg 9/11 core.

@AppleAmps @shroomie fond memories of watching that film in geography class and getting yelled at for eating popcorn through it

@FiringSquadsEnjoyer @shroomie
You might be kinda based.

@AppleAmps now consider: how many people do you think are in a bad financial position, who would be willing to press blue, to risk their lives on the chance that somehow 50%+ of people ignored the incentive (and the guarantee that if 50%+ choose blue, *nobody dies*)