Blue button because it’s the superior moral choice. Moreover, the red button world becomes shithole tier hell with all of the genuinely cooperative people eliminated. High trust is gone and you have global izzat chicanery. May God have mercy on red buttoners.
@BowsacNoodle@Griffith@LukeAlmighty It doesn't take that long to think about the problem and to come to the conclusion that nobody dies if everyone presses the red button. The vote is secret but rational people are going to come to the same conclusion as Griffith by just gaming it out in their head.
@LukeAlmighty@BowsacNoodle No I didn’t. If everyone knows red button pressers are guaranteed to survive, we can just all agree to press the red button. Since there’s no upside to the blue button, everyone presses red, and everyone survives.
@ceo_of_monoeye_dating@Griffith@BowsacNoodle Well, you could call me midwhit if that is a sufficient explanation, but I simply do not expect everyone to act rational. Where did that ever happen in hystory?
Nah. I want to go for the option, that ends up with noone dying. Simple as that. And we both know, that there will be many people who will try to save everyone, and that knowledge itself turns the red button from "obvious" to a selfish one.
An idiot who has no morality just presses red. A careful mathematician also estimates that everyone else is a rational actor and observes that red is the Nash Equilibrium in this game - hoping that everyone else is as smart as him and also presses red.
I do not understand the psychology of someone who picks blue and then rationalizes it for a lengthy period of time afterwards.
I press blue expecting that at least 50% of people will either be stupid, or willing to ensure the good outcome for everyone, since anyone without a robotic thinking will know that there are people in the blue category.
@ceo_of_monoeye_dating@Griffith@BowsacNoodle This reminds me of the Covid vax debate, where some "smart" people got truly pissed off, when they said: The best option is if everyone get's vaxed. The 2nd best is when noone gets vaxed. But the worst one is when half of population gets the vax, because then the virus can adapt.
Me: And since you know that half the population will refuse, you will give it up, right?
Them: So, why cannot these idiots just get vaxed????
All their IQ didn't allow them to see, that they chose the worst option just on principle of the best one not being possible.
@LukeAlmighty@Griffith@BowsacNoodle Expecting literally everyone to act rationally is silly, of course, but I would absolutely not expect *more than half* the population to act irrationally.
Pressing blue is just suicide. I expect any adult to realize this. I expect any adult to be able to explain this to their children - and I assume that in this situation, even if the votes are secret, the parents have the ability to explain this to their kids before they vote.
If there's a lengthy amount of time before the vote, then the rationale for pressing red can be made to everyone. Mathematicians around the world will shriek to the populace, "I am pressing red, and for the love of all that is holy you must as well."
I am familiar with game theory. Blue is the morally correct choice. Red is the correct choice for those you care about and your own survival. It’s not even a contest. I still choose blue (at least online) because I prefer no one die.
Reminds me of the fun standoff clip I saw from the show “Golden Ball“. I wish I could find it.
You can’t control others’ actions, even if you’re showing them the rationality. Therefore there is a chance you will be contributing to their death. I’m so sci-fi irony poisoned I half expect a circumstance like this come from some deus ex alien that kills the selfish reds.
@BowsacNoodle@LukeAlmighty@ceo_of_monoeye_dating I personally think it’s brainrot to punish people that make the right choice. Feels very anti-racist to me. It’s only selfish if your life is worth nothing, and there’s nothing lost by pressing the red button. Blue button people are essentially killing themselves on the basis of a useless principle. If there was a single downside to everyone pressing red, I would flip, but there’s not, so the argument boils down to “risk your life, because some people can’t read instructions.”
lol...someone has to justify why their religion is better than mine...before i waste a semester learning it...especially if their motivating example is the contested garment rule from the talmud...
Sure the assumptions of Game Theory do not apply 100% of the time, but they absolutely do apply here and we should use tools that apply without crying that they don't always apply.
But everyone doesn’t pick blue. I have already addressed this. Furthermore, the people who don’t pick blue might include genuinely good people who are high trust. More likely than not.
That is not the issue. The issue is that whether or not you press the red/blue buttons and whether or not the majority presses the red/blue buttons are essentially independent of each other. This means your choices do meaningfully boil down to "maybe I die" and "I definitely don't die." Because there are exactly two meaningful outcomes, you can quantize them and apply game theory.
Frondeur is saying: "Game theory does not always apply, because we cannot always give these choices a value that is the same for each person." But because there's only those two alternatives, we can in fact do this, simply by labeling "maybe I die" as 0 and "I definitely don't die" as 1.
If there was a third alternative, Frondeur would have a valid objection, because those might have different values for different people. There is not a third alternative, and Frondeur is just being pedantic.
@Frondeur@LukeAlmighty@aceattorneybot@BowsacNoodle@karna@ceo_of_monoeye_dating There's not a concievable second value here. Maybe some people want to die but they can vote blue no matter who. Without deconstructing human desires completely into mush, we can assume humans want to live, and want other humans to live.
no...i dont think i will be looking at your matrix...because even without looking at it...either it ascribes payouts or it's ill defined...those are the rules of the game...and of course in ascribing payouts you are making a universal claim to knowledge of value...
another way to look at it...game theorists not avoiding constructing a falsifiable theory difficulty...
yes...ceo of monoeye cannot conceive of people valuing things differently than him so yes that is probably a form of bounded rationality...but i meant more generally that since we are assuming how other people would behave you need a universal of rationality...
There's 7-8 billion people in the world. Your vote does not matter in any meaningful way. Either most people will press blue or most people will press red.
If you press red, then either nobody dies or everyone who pressed blue dies. If you press blue, then either nobody dies or everyone who pressed blue *plus you* dies.
Your choices are functionally "maybe I die" or "I definitely don't die." Yes, each square is going to have varying utility for each person, but you have two choices, and there is only one difference between the two choices. Game theory applies unless you want to account for the astronomically small probability that your vote mattered.
i've seen the original poll restated as "everyone is in a giant blender. If you press the red button you get to leave, if greater than 50% of people press the blue button, the blender doesn't turn on" and the results were very different from the original poll
@Shadowbroker2135@LukeAlmighty@BowsacNoodle Sorry, I have seen reality and know that nobody really trusts each other. Red is the only guarantee that we live if we all push it. Blue implies some progressive idea of implicit trust of all people cross national and cross racial. Its a huge gamble and blue buttoners deserve what they get coming to them.
Everyone won’t vote blue. I assume a lot of ‘good‘ people will vote blue. In fact, I assume more good people will vote blue than red. In reality, red would likely win because it is factually a risk-free choice for yourself. Only a silly goose wouldn’t see that. But, I choose blue for internet poll and argument because I support the good.
@BowsacNoodle@LukeAlmighty@Shadowbroker2135 Why do you assume anyone would vote blue? Barring accidents, what’s the rationale for voting blue? Everyone votes red, the risk is eliminated, no one dies, we all go home.
@Shadowbroker2135@LukeAlmighty@BowsacNoodle Except if everyone votes red, everyone walks. There’s 0 risk if everyone votes red, so it’s the optimal solution. Voting blue essentially means you didn’t read the assignment.
Lets be honest here, if every featherless biped on this planet votes, red's winning. You only need to look at a population map to see most of the world ALWAYS votes red, every single time, every single opportunity. That's why they are what they are.
But you know what? I'm voting blue anyway. Because some outcomes are actually worse than death, and living on a Red Planet is one of them.
@apropos@LukeAlmighty@BowsacNoodle@Shadowbroker2135 See, this is my real problem. It becomes an IQ test, and I don’t want to be dragged down by the blues. In this scenario, it might even be rigged, and blue is guaranteed to lose. I think there’s a deeper problem with associating good with low-IQ. I find smart people are more empathetic, so I hope they would make the smart decision, so they’re guaranteed to go on living. Choosing blue is a reckless endangerment of their own life. It tests what feels good versus what is actually good, and I’m going to choose what’s actually good no matter what.
@Griffith@BowsacNoodle@LukeAlmighty@Shadowbroker2135 people will certainly vote blue because this is such an obvious opportunity to freely genocide white Christian boomers, that there will be an enormous wave of propaganda in support of voting blue. You don't want other people to die, do you?
This poll needs to carry some real world weight. Make it a timeout from the fedi for like two months? Team Risk gets their way they can be smug and lord it over Team Safe.
But anyone who thinks things will go according to plan hasn't been paying attention to how our democracy works. Influx of red votes from an instance nobody is familiar with in 3, 2, ...
Another is the wording. The word "save" literally implies that some people are in danger already. And that assumption literally forces people to get into the danger zone in the first place. :D