but its not a rational decision when everyone choosign red is a a guaranteed win. Choosing blue is like choosing to veer into traffic. Statistics is fine if there is no rationality behind the decision but once you take it into accoutn it should be completely feasible that everyone would choose the same option. The one that guarantees a win. This would be far different if the scenario was like red will only die if 100% choose red and then 10% will randomly be killed. In that scenario choosing red is more likely to have you survive but since people will now die at 100% red then blue is the only way to guarantee no one will die. As set out though the easiest way to make sure no one dies is for no one to press blue. People pressing blue might as well be pressing a kill me button.
but its not a rational decision when everyone choosign red is a a guaranteed win.
For you. It’s only a guaranteed win, for you. There is no guarantee for anyone else.
Statistics is fine if there is no rationality behind the decision but once you take it into accoutn it should be completely feasible that everyone would choose the same option.
But, expecting everyone to choose red is not rational. At best, there’s only a 1% chance that will happen…and in reality, it’s even lower than that. Therefore, choosing red is the same thing as choosing to save yourself at the cost of someone else’s life.
Choosing blue is the only option that actually saves everyone, even with a simple majority…which is far more likely than 100%.
Choosing blue is choosing death for yourself. Its possible you may not die with blue but definate you will not with red as will anyone else that chooses red. No one who chooses red will die. Why would anyone assume others would make a choice of death. Choosing red is the only logical choice in this scenario. It would need to be modified a bit for red to not be the obvious choice. Like allowing for a choice not to be made or for some red to die if to many press red. Blue is a choice to kill yourself from some misguided quest to save folks from killing themselves.
its not because no one is at risk of death unless they choose blue. There is nothing selfish about red because only people who choose to die die. In this scenario 100% of people are able to protect themselves. they don’t need protection. An equivalent way of saying it is aliens will fire a weapon that every starship has a foce field which 100% blocks. The aliens say they will not fire if at least 50% of starships surrender by dropping their shields. All starships know that they and all other starships are in no danger if they don’t drop their shields.
It is statistically impossible that everyone will choose red. That’s just a fact. If enough people choose red…millions or even billions of people will die. That’s what you’re choosing.
no its not. its not a random event. its a logical event. Anyone who looks at how the system works will see that no one can die unless they choose to option to possibly die. There is zero reason to protect anyone because everyone is immune to being killed if they want to. Statistics is about how things will fall when there is variation. Everyone eats enough when they have access to food to not starve. Its not a statistical impossibility for that to happen becuase its a logical occurence. So everyone can choose red because the rules make that the logical choice. Pressing red does not kill anyone unless they chose to be a a death group. Pressing blue is what kills people. Again it would only take a slight variation to completely upend this thought experiment but as written red is the obvious choice. Like if the rule was the last person to choose defaulted to blue or something then it would completely change what to push as there is a victim but as it stands any victims created themselves due to some delusion that they are procting other victims who chose to be in the situation.
There’s nothing “logical” about what you’re saying.
Here is the logic behind both strategies…
The “red” strategy requires a 100% unanimous decision in order for everyone to survive. That means that all 8 billion people on Earth need to all make the same choice.
Versus the “blue” strategy that only requires a simple majority of 51% in order for everyone to survive.
The “logical” solution is to do the math. It is far more likely to achieve a simple majority than it is to achieve perfect unity. By choosing red, you are guaranteeing that at least some people will die, versus choosing blue which guarantees that everyone survives.
The red strategy guarantees the user and everone survives because the only way for a death to occur is for someone to press blue.
The blue strategy attemps to protect other people who press blue because they feel they might even though absolutely no one will die unless people press blue.
Deaths can only occur if the people in the pool press blue. Red guarantees no deaths if people are logical about how the system works. There is no math as death can only occur from choosing blue. Blue does the opposite of guaranteeing everyone survives from choosing red because any blue presses make death a possible outcome. It is the very opposite of guranteeing everyone survives.
but its not a rational decision when everyone choosign red is a a guaranteed win. Choosing blue is like choosing to veer into traffic. Statistics is fine if there is no rationality behind the decision but once you take it into accoutn it should be completely feasible that everyone would choose the same option. The one that guarantees a win. This would be far different if the scenario was like red will only die if 100% choose red and then 10% will randomly be killed. In that scenario choosing red is more likely to have you survive but since people will now die at 100% red then blue is the only way to guarantee no one will die. As set out though the easiest way to make sure no one dies is for no one to press blue. People pressing blue might as well be pressing a kill me button.
For you. It’s only a guaranteed win, for you. There is no guarantee for anyone else.
But, expecting everyone to choose red is not rational. At best, there’s only a 1% chance that will happen…and in reality, it’s even lower than that. Therefore, choosing red is the same thing as choosing to save yourself at the cost of someone else’s life.
Choosing blue is the only option that actually saves everyone, even with a simple majority…which is far more likely than 100%.
Choosing blue is choosing death for yourself. Its possible you may not die with blue but definate you will not with red as will anyone else that chooses red. No one who chooses red will die. Why would anyone assume others would make a choice of death. Choosing red is the only logical choice in this scenario. It would need to be modified a bit for red to not be the obvious choice. Like allowing for a choice not to be made or for some red to die if to many press red. Blue is a choice to kill yourself from some misguided quest to save folks from killing themselves.
Choosing blue is choosing to risk your own life to save everyone else. Choosing red is choosing to save yourself, even if it means someone else dies.
Saying that choosing to save yourself at the expense of others, is “the only logical choice”, is the definition of selfish.
its not because no one is at risk of death unless they choose blue. There is nothing selfish about red because only people who choose to die die. In this scenario 100% of people are able to protect themselves. they don’t need protection. An equivalent way of saying it is aliens will fire a weapon that every starship has a foce field which 100% blocks. The aliens say they will not fire if at least 50% of starships surrender by dropping their shields. All starships know that they and all other starships are in no danger if they don’t drop their shields.
It is statistically impossible that everyone will choose red. That’s just a fact. If enough people choose red…millions or even billions of people will die. That’s what you’re choosing.
no its not. its not a random event. its a logical event. Anyone who looks at how the system works will see that no one can die unless they choose to option to possibly die. There is zero reason to protect anyone because everyone is immune to being killed if they want to. Statistics is about how things will fall when there is variation. Everyone eats enough when they have access to food to not starve. Its not a statistical impossibility for that to happen becuase its a logical occurence. So everyone can choose red because the rules make that the logical choice. Pressing red does not kill anyone unless they chose to be a a death group. Pressing blue is what kills people. Again it would only take a slight variation to completely upend this thought experiment but as written red is the obvious choice. Like if the rule was the last person to choose defaulted to blue or something then it would completely change what to push as there is a victim but as it stands any victims created themselves due to some delusion that they are procting other victims who chose to be in the situation.
There’s nothing “logical” about what you’re saying.
Here is the logic behind both strategies…
The “red” strategy requires a 100% unanimous decision in order for everyone to survive. That means that all 8 billion people on Earth need to all make the same choice.
Versus the “blue” strategy that only requires a simple majority of 51% in order for everyone to survive.
The “logical” solution is to do the math. It is far more likely to achieve a simple majority than it is to achieve perfect unity. By choosing red, you are guaranteeing that at least some people will die, versus choosing blue which guarantees that everyone survives.
I disagree.
The red strategy guarantees the user and everone survives because the only way for a death to occur is for someone to press blue.
The blue strategy attemps to protect other people who press blue because they feel they might even though absolutely no one will die unless people press blue.
Deaths can only occur if the people in the pool press blue. Red guarantees no deaths if people are logical about how the system works. There is no math as death can only occur from choosing blue. Blue does the opposite of guaranteeing everyone survives from choosing red because any blue presses make death a possible outcome. It is the very opposite of guranteeing everyone survives.