Naomi Clark (@metasynthie) 暗悪直美 @halfrobot.com · Apr 24 [ broken game theory brain ] Red is the optimal and rational choice since there is no risk of death. Therefore anyone who chooses blue is defective; their elimination will lead to a more rational society. Red is the objectively correct choice. (helps murder 49% of population)
30 likes 9 replies
Replies
Assuming you cannot coordinate a vote or see how others voted, blue is the only ethical choice. Red has a chance to kill people. I care less about dying than I do potentially having a hand in the death of others just to assure my own safety.
I think there's too many ways to read it to be sure of how people will understand it and behave. I think 'if you press red, you won't die' is a very easy case to argue and would easily persuade a great many people I agree that co-operation is better, but I wouldn't be confident betting on it
So are we ready for an expansion pack yet? This format calls for adding 'stuff'. [BLUE] - If plurality vote blue, everyone survives [RED] - If plurality vote red, only red survives [GREEN] - If plurality vote green, red and blue voters survive. Every green voter, if they survive, gets $100,000.
I liked your framing it as risk of getting killed vs risk of getting someone else killed. That'd probably be my thought process as well, like, well everyone ought to press red, but it's very likely not everyone will, so I ought to press blue.
Hahaha, I think this is a flawed set up, because everyone should just choose red and it's fine. There needs to be some reason why people *wouldn't* just pick red. (Cake or death?)
turns out game theory is just a fancy excuse for psychopathy
This is a test of reading comprehension and logic. If you understand that you always survive when pressing red you pass. The morality of accidentally killing the majority of people who can’t understand it is up to your beliefs.
im realllly curious how these results (quantitative but also in terms of people's discussions/arguments) would change at different %s.