Support NeoGAF

[Newari]

I reflexively would choose red (and I voted that), because that is the obvious correct answer to the logic puzzle in the question. But some people will get it wrong and that's where the morals part comes in.
I see a lot of people asking the same logic question with different wording, making the red seem more and more obvious, but for the moral part, the words matter. My take for re wording would be to make the underlying logic puzzle more obvious, say a math quiz. If you answer the quiz correctly, you live. If more than 50% of people fail the quiz, everyone lives, if under 50% fail, all those who failed die. Would you fail on purpose to prevent those who fail on accident from dying?

 

[John Bilbo]

I reflexively would choose red (and I voted that), because that is the obvious correct answer to the logic puzzle in the question. But some people will get it wrong and that's where the morals part comes in.
I see a lot of people asking the same logic question with different wording, making the red seem more and more obvious, but for the moral part, the words matter. My take for re wording would be to make the underlying logic puzzle more obvious, say a math quiz. If you answer the quiz correctly, you live. If more than 50% of people fail the quiz, everyone lives, if under 50% fail, all those who failed die. Would you fail on purpose to prevent those who fail on accident from dying?

Interesting take!

 

[IFireflyl]

I picked red. It has the 100% live chance, and everyone should just pick red. If little kids are pressing this button, they should have someone in their life telling them to press red. (EDIT: It's a private vote, and there is no outside intervention.) If kids don't vote red, then that really sucks.

Based on the current ratio, it appears I was wise to vote red. It's not looking good for you blue folks. Sorry you're all dead soon.

 

[nkarafo]

You forgot the part where we are talking about living in a world with only selfish people.

You forgot the part where not wanting to die with a group that (for them) is mathematically pretty much already dead is not heroic, it's pointless.

You also forgot the part where choosing a way out from a world because you assume "it's not worth living" is also selfish. You are still thinking what's best for your own ass.

No thanks yawl can have that.

Maybe you are having it too. Maybe you aren't pressing blue, you just say you want to.

It's easy to virtue signal when there are zero stakes.

 

[falconhoof]

Can we move this topic on now?

There's 91 people for the wood chipper here, that's a lot of gaming assets to distribute out amongst the Red survivors.

If there are any 5090's on the go I'd like to put my name down for one.

 

[Idleyes]

You forgot the part where not wanting to die with a group that (for them) is mathematically pretty much already dead is not heroic, it's pointless.

You also forgot the part where choosing a way out from a world because you assume "it's not worth living" is also selfish. You are still thinking what's best for your own ass.



Maybe you are having it too. Maybe you aren't pressing blue, you just say you want to.

It's easy to virtue signal when there are zero stakes.

Calm down man I'm just making shit up. The whole scenario is fiction.

 

[nkarafo]

There's 91 people for the wood chipper here, that's a lot of gaming assets to distribute out amongst the Red survivors.

If there are any 5090's on the go I'd like to put my name down for one.

We are not getting anything they rather burn all their belongings if there's a chance they will end up with us.

Calm down man I'm just making shit up. The whole scenario is fiction.

I know, just making sure

 

[Bojji]

Can we move this topic on now?

There's 91 people for the wood chipper here, that's a lot of gaming assets to distribute out amongst the Red survivors.

If there are any 5090's on the go I'd like to put my name down for one.

We are taking all your women with us (they would vote blue) and we will fuck them in the afterlife!

 

[Idleyes]

We are taking all your women with us (they would vote blue) and we will fuck them in the afterlife!

some of the people who said they'd chose red sound like they'd definitely pick blue.

 

[falconhoof]

We are taking all your women with us (they would vote blue) and we will fuck them in the afterlife!

Dude, I have a 5090 and a whole lot of AI has just been free'd up. I can render my own women. All the women. So many fucking women.

 

[nkarafo]

We are taking all your women with us (they would vote blue) and we will fuck them in the afterlife!

Damn, that's sinister. Downright diabolic. Taking advantage of of such crisis to get our women, using their empathy and even risking your lives to achieve it. I thought you were the nice people!

 

[Bojji]

Damn, that's sinister. Downright diabolic. Taking advantage of of such crisis to get our women, using their empathy and even risking your lives to achieve it. I thought you were the nice people!

We were only pretending

I love that theoretical question like that makes people hostile to each other, if GAF was in the bar it would look like this

 

[Idleyes]

We were only pretending

for real, nothing in the question says anything about anyone having the opportunity to discuse their picks with the people they care about in advance. He's forcing a narrative to basically say "I'm not bad, they are!".

 

[nkarafo]

I love that theoretical question like that makes people hostile to each other, if GAF was in the bar it would look like this

Thankfully it's GAF so in the end it would look like this

 

[John Bilbo]

We are taking all your women with us (they would vote blue) and we will fuck them in the afterlife!

All the empathetic women, gone. Truly too good for this world the angels they are. Better than men, really.

Except for the team blue men. They might get closer to women... in their death.

 

[Boozeroony]

All the empathetic women, gone. Truly too good for this world the angels they are. Better than men, really.

Except for the team blue men. They might get closer to women... in their death.

Sounds like a nice religion!

 

[nkarafo]

Sounds like a nice religion!

Yeah, at least this time the women are adults.

 

[John Bilbo]

Sounds like a nice religion!

Mostly peaceful!

 

[TheUnicornGuy]

And that's just deciding over cheese & onion or salt & vinegar.

 

[poodaddy]

And that's just deciding over cheese & onion or salt & vinegar.

Exactly, what kind of fucking monster wouldn't choose cheese and onion?

 

[Trilobit]

People say that if the blues won they would shame the reds to oblivion and exact revenge. But I'd just go:

and say that I thought red meant what the blue stood for and go:

"I'm glad it all worked out in the end"

Bulletproof.

 

[John Bilbo]

People say that if the blues won they would shame the reds to oblivion and exact revenge. But I'd just go:

and say that I thought red meant what the blue stood for and go:

"I'm glad it all worked out in the end"

Bulletproof.

 

[Meicyn]

Angry mob of red voters angry about trans...portation issues again?

Spoiler

What blue voters would actually do at red voters:

 

[INC]

Whatever button ends humanity quicker

 

[Grenseal]

 

[Unfortunatecookie]

Dude, I have a 5090 and a whole lot of AI has just been free'd up. I can render my own women. All the women. So many fucking women.

There's something beautifully sinister about that sentence.

 

[Bojji]

There's something beautifully sinister about that sentence.

This was predicted in 1985

 

[Unfortunatecookie]

This was predicted in 1985

Shiiiiit

 

[BloodFree]

Whatever button ends humanity quicker

That would be the red one. Best case for that is something like 50%+1 red, so that everyone else dies. Might be interesting to spectate from the afterlife if nothing else.

 

[Three]

I reflexively would choose red (and I voted that), because that is the obvious correct answer to the logic puzzle in the question. But some people will get it wrong and that's where the morals part comes in.
I see a lot of people asking the same logic question with different wording, making the red seem more and more obvious, but for the moral part, the words matter. My take for re wording would be to make the underlying logic puzzle more obvious, say a math quiz. If you answer the quiz correctly, you live. If more than 50% of people fail the quiz, everyone lives, if under 50% fail, all those who failed die. Would you fail on purpose to prevent those who fail on accident from dying?

This is a strange rewording/reframing that tries to portray your pressing of the red button as some kind of achievement or denial of show of intellect when the original question has no element like that. What's even more bizarre about human behaviour is that if you reframed this through the lens of a bunch of underachievers/criminals most people would not choose red due to a different "virtue" known as camaraderie that should have saved anybody from dying:

The police have no evidence in a case against a mafia/gang. They round up all members and ask them to rat on other members. Those who rat (choose red) dont get any sentences but those who dont may get life sentences if enough rats give evidence. If nobody gives evidence nothing changes and everyone is safe.

Would you sell out other people?

 

[Trilobit]

Inverse on NeoGaf, but still.

 

[Valonquar]

40% OF GAF DEAD AS FUCK

 

[John Bilbo]

Inverse on NeoGaf, but still.

From the comments

 

[Bojji]

From the comments

 

[John Bilbo]

 

[ZeroZeroQuatre]

Ha ha, I was just working on the same picture, with a bit more nuance perhaps, cause it's safe to assume that the random distribution of those who cannot really connect with the question would place them on both sides equally.

 

[Bojji]

Ha ha, I was just working on the same picture, with a bit more nuance perhaps, cause it's safe to assume that the random distribution of those who cannot really connect with the question would place them on both sides equally.

Yeah, people like that will end up on both sides. But only the red devils don't care about them, hahaha.

 

[Wildebeest]

The trolley problem is the angry red guy desperately trying to switch the tram from the empty track to the blue track, and failing, to prove to the world that blues are stupid and deserve to die.

 

[Zacfoldor]

I look at it as a problem of risks. I can't choose for everyone. Red has zero risks for me. So the likelihood of all blues being killed assuming we have several days to make our choice and the Internet does its thing, is very high. The "smarts" online will all have been clued in that red is ideal and so > 50% are choosing red. The non-chronic online, the out of touch, the naïve, and the outliers of our society would likely choose blue and be killed.

I do feel terribly sorry for blue but at the same time you could not pay me to select blue because it is guaranteed death. /alwayshasbeen.gif

IMHO, since blue is guaranteed death and voting for blue represents the greater good the real question here and the point of this question is to identify those that would sacrifice their lives for the greater good. I'm not one of them, but I'm proud of those who are. If you answered blue, would you not also sacrifice yourself so some other humans on Earth would live? Yes because you just made that choice! Be proud you stood tall and for what's right in the face of hypothetical death.

 

[Bojji]

I look at it as a problem of risks. I can't choose for everyone. Red has zero risks for me. So the likelihood of all blues being killed assuming we have several days to make our choice and the Internet does its thing, is very high. The "smarts" online will all have been clued in that red is ideal and so > 50% are choosing red. The non-chronic online, the out of touch, the naïve, and the outliers of our society would likely choose blue and be killed.

I do feel terribly sorry for blue but at the same time you could not pay me to select blue because it is guaranteed death. /alwayshasbeen.gif

Both OT poll on X and Mr. Beast poll were left with BLUE winning - ~220k people sample.

Why are some people so sure that red would always win?

 

[John Marston]

Thankfully it's GAF so in the end it would look like this

 

[Zacfoldor]

Both OT poll on X and Mr. Beast poll were left with BLUE winning - ~220k people sample.

Why are some people so sure that red would always win?

You know that's interesting. Perhaps it is a deficiency in the outlook of a group I'm in. Perhaps we see the world differently than the majority and I've never realized it.

In my mind, the question is so clear cut that I could never imagine blue garnering many votes. It seems impossible to me in a realistic scenario. I understand this is an issue with my perception, but it's very interesting. There seem to be at least 2 distinct ways of thinking on this issue. Very cool, lol. Philosophy is cool. In a way, it's like the dress photo that no one could agree on the color of the dress.

 

[Three]

The fact that it's being compared to an unrelated thought experiment shows that they haven't thought it through very well.

It's more like this:

The blues are trying to direct the train to the track where nobody is killed but they have to get on the track to do it while the reds try to fight against the blues to redirect it towards the track where the blues are pulling. Either everybody gets off the track which is highly unlikely or the reds just join the blues to pull the lever to the safer option.

 

[Bojji]

The fact that it's being compared to an unrelated thought experiment shows that they haven't thought it through very well.

It's more like this:

The blues are trying to direct the train to the track where nobody is killed but they have to get on the track to do it while the reds try to fight against the blues to redirect it towards the track where the blues are pulling. Either everybody gets off the track which is highly unlikely or the reds just join the blues to pull the lever to the safer option.

This is probably the best representation of that (in Trolley Problem universe).

 

[epicurius-seven]

I don't put much stock in no-pressure public polls. Especially if you can see the votes before you vote yourself.

The original question says nothing more than you get to push a button. There's nothing indicating how long you have to make the choice, or that anyone can observe anyone else during their decision making.
It also says nothing about people incapable of making informed decisions (infants and the disabled), so we seem to have informally agreed some votes are random and I'd argue some people cannot choose at all. Are they exempt?

Without further information, presumably if the blues lose they just cease living.
'If I lose I cease to exist' doesn't seem all that terrible as opposed to some heinous death. The fear of a painful death is much greater than the fear of just... ending.

 

[nkarafo]

Both OT poll on X and Mr. Beast poll were left with BLUE winning - ~220k people sample.

Why are some people so sure that red would always win?

Funny forum games while sipping hot coffee in their cozy room, cat purring on their lap and birds singing outside and not actually being in a cold, dark room with slime dripping from the ceiling and dried blood covering every wall, chains and cries being heard in the background, gambling with their existence and potential suffering like being put in an oven to roast alive.

Easier to vote what they want to do, not what they would really do since there are no stakes.

Easier to convince themselves they are heroes and not your average weak human since there are no stakes.

Easier to ignore math and probability and just vote emotion since there are no stakes.

Virtue signalling looks good but being pragmatic looks bad. There are no stakes so...

Wanting to be brave and heroic feels good but admitting they might be afraid and backup the last moment feels bad. There are no stakes so...


In conclusion: Blue results are very volatile and subject to change under pressure.

 

[falconhoof]

The fact that it's being compared to an unrelated thought experiment shows that they haven't thought it through very well.

It's more like this:

The blues are trying to direct the train to the track where nobody is killed but they have to get on the track to do it while the reds try to fight against the blues to redirect it towards the track where the blues are pulling. Either everybody gets off the track which is highly unlikely or the reds just join the blues to pull the lever to the safer option.

This is a completely false representation of it.

Red do not know about Blue

Blue do not know about Red

Best either can do is imagine what others might do and press their chosen button.

There are now crowds, no numbers to evaluate, nothing to persuade/guilt trip.

 

[Three]

This is a completely false representation of it.

Red do not know about Blue

Blue do not know about Red

Best either can do is imagine what others might do and press their chosen button.

There are now crowds, no numbers to evaluate, nothing to persuade/guilt trip.

Well I wasn't the one who made the analogy to the trolley problem but it's the best representation of this problem in trolley problem form.

What do you mean by they don't know about blue too? They know those voting blue would die if the number of red people pulling in that direction is greater than blue. They don't have evidential decision theory yet (they don't know how many are on that track) but it stands to reason that not every single person on the planet will press the red button. They still have causal decision theory though to make a rational choice.
Now that you also have evidence that, as expected, not everybody on the planet would vote red would you change your vote to blue or do you regret pulling in the opposite direction?

The reds still know they are pulling in the direction that will kill anybody on the blue track. They don't know how many or who. If it helps put a screen between the blue and red people so they can't see eachother but it's a pretty accurate representation of the problem.

 

[AJUMP23]

40% OF GAF DEAD

 

[falconhoof]

Well I wasn't the one who made the analogy to the trolley problem but it's the best representation of this problem in trolley problem form.

What do you mean by they don't know about blue too? They know those voting blue would die if the number of red people pulling in that direction is greater than blue. They don't have evidential decision theory yet (they don't know how many are on that track) but it stands to reason that not every single person on the planet will press the red button. They still have causal decision theory though to make a rational choice.
Now that you also have evidence that, as expected, not everybody on the planet would vote red would you change your vote to blue or do you regret pulling in the opposite direction?

The reds still know they are pulling in the direction that will kill anybody on the blue track. They don't know how many or who. If it helps put a screen between the blue and red people so they can't see eachother but it's a pretty accurate representation of the problem.

The image literally shows "Team Red" asking if they should help "Team Blue". A discussion, a division, between groups. The problem faced is an individual one, people don't get to be pre-approved or check what their peers are up to.

There are no teams in this. There's no signaling to others, unlike how we're seeing it in online polls and posts. Each individual must decide on their own with only their own thoughts to guide them.

I'm not making any statements here or answering questions based on these given pictures/polls because in reality I would have none of those things when making this decision.

What all these things are is just people trying to justify their position by either talking about how amazing it makes them look or how demonic it makes the opponent look. They're not reframing the problem in meaningful ways. Not even like the mathematical style breakdowns.