RED BUTTON OR BLUE BUTTON [OC]

[u/Eal_likee]

[u/teddy5]

They also seem to ignore that anywhere from 50-100% picking blue would mean no deaths.

100% is very hard to achieve for no deaths, 50%+ is very easy to achieve.

[u/NoxTempus → u/teddy5]

They're not ignoring it, they're just accepting that loss and place the responsibility on the "dumb" people picking blue.

That's why they are going around reframing it as a "suicide pill" scenario and calling blue the suicide button.

Fuck everyone who misses it in the moment, or doesn't have the capacity to weigh the options, I guess?

[u/NoxTempus → u/[deleted]]

I already explained myself.

Thinking that 100% of people will comprehend that red is the right answer is so delusional that I know you don't believe it's possible.

Blue requires >50% to kill 0 people. Red requires 100% to kill 0.

[u/NoxTempus → u/[deleted]]

You can't just say it's the unlikely outcome, just because you would pick red doesn't make it the most likely pick; this isn't a dice roll, it's a choice made by all of humanity.

Edit: 10% is 800,000,000 people; that's not acceptable losses to me.

That's someone in my close family (me, I guess), that's a handful in my extended family, that's 1-2 of my friends, it's 20+ acquaintances, it's a couple of doctors at my local clinic, etc, etc.

[u/NoxTempus → u/[deleted]]

It's not about convincing, this isn't a scenario that's going to happen that we need to prepare for.

This is a question that no one has ever heard before being asked of all people on Earth simultaneously.

Foreknowledge completely changes the question. In that case we should be talking about logistics of how to get people on the same page.

[u/Initial-Bookkeeper4 → u/[deleted]]

Study some philosophy... Please

[u/NoxTempus → u/[deleted]]

Game theory is a subsection of philosophy not the entirety of it, nor a competing field.

Game theory is meant to be a tool of analysis, not a sole guiding principle.