Board 8 > Do you push the red or blue button?

(+) Yeah! (+)

This button already exists in the real world. It's called an electrical socket. I choose not to stick a metal fork in it.

I'm torn between pushing the red button at no loss and pushing the blue button for the thrills

I pushed blue before reading the options and I have no regrets

Have any of y'all asked the general population about this? Everyone I've asked has said blue, even after I've pointed out that red makes them immune to death. Their gut reaction was blue and then they didn't change their mind after further consideration.

Anonymity is a strong enabler but yes blue winning wouldn't surprise me a ton.

So you understand how different of a question that is than if this was actually conducted as states?

This is basically the prisoners dilemma writ large, and like with the prisoners dilemma, the optimal strategy in round one (the only round) is cooperate ie press blue.

foolm0r0n posted...

So you understand how different of a question that is than if this was actually conducted as states?

Are you talking to me? I'm sorry, I don't understand this message. Can you reword it?

It's not prisoner's dilemma at all

NeatoAnAccount posted...

Are you talking to me? I'm sorry, I don't understand this message. Can you reword it?

You got 100% in your interviews vs 50% blue in the b8 poll

So clearly there's a huge difference between the question in the context of a face-to-face interview vs an online poll, right?

So obviously there would also be a huge difference between those contexts, and a realistic context where people were actually asked this question with their lives on the line.

foolm0r0n posted...

You got 100% in your interviews vs 50% blue in the b8 poll

So clearly there's a huge difference between the question in the context of a face-to-face interview vs an online poll, right?

So obviously there would also be a huge difference between those contexts, and a realistic context where people were actually asked this question with their lives on the line.

My interviews were 3 people. I expect that if I went out and asked more people I would get some reds. But I believe that they're not that unusual among the general population. The twitter poll that inspired this question is 65% blue with 69k votes:

https://twitter.com/lisatomic5/status/1690904441967575040

There's also the issue of framing. There was another twitter poll with an equivalent question, and that one wound up 65% red with 4750 votes: If <50% of people pick blue blues die. Red always lives.

https://twitter.com/_ali_taylor/status/1691108374920704001

But I think that the question as posed in the OP would lead to >50% of blues,which is why I voted blue, and it looks like I'm correct.

foolm0r0n posted...

It's not prisoner's dilemma at all

Its not exactly the same because there arent as many outcomes but it is very similar. The twist is basically that if everybody betrays there is no harm, and its simple majority rather than only two participants doing the same thing. Either way in game theory terms, blue is clearly the optimal strategy.

There's really no betray here though.

The options are literally "you always live" vs "you could die"

FFDragon posted...

There's really no betray here though.

The options are literally "you always live" vs "you could die"

Red is betray because there will always be some people picking blue given a large enough sample. Especially given that you know that people will pick blue to try and get it over 50% and save everyone. So it is still the same principle of personal gain over mutual help, just with lower consequences for the one doing it.

There should be no need to save everyone because there is no upside to picking blue.

Picking blue is basically assisted suicide.

At it's most magnanimous interpretation, you're pointlessly risking your life to save other people who pointlessly risked their lives by voting blue. That's not something most of you would do in any other situation and for good reason.

If you choose to push blue you are literally killing yourself from your own stupidity. I feel no guilt if people die from that.

Yeah I guess that's more my point. Blue people are only in danger because they choose to willingly put themselves in danger. So there's no betrayal.

Just vote red. Everyone wins

Given that this choice is being forced upon the entire population of the world, there are going to be millions or even billions of children/mentally ill people picking blue without actually understanding their choice. Not to mention perfectly rational people picking blue for hundreds of possible reasons, even as simple as they just straight up panicked on being forced into such a crazy situation. But congratulations to all the red pickers for convincing yourselves these people dont deserve to live because they were stupid/asking for it.

In a smaller scale prisoner's dilemma type game you could actually reasonably expect everyone to pick red if everyone had time to discuss how the rules work and the risk of each option.

Blue is not the optimal strategy. Red is the optimal strategy but kills people who don't understand the rules of the game or are attempting to protect people who they think don't understand the rules of the game.

Blue only has upside over red because human stupidity, presumption, and randomness exist. But if everyone was thinking about the question? Red is the answer.

tcaz2 posted...

If you choose to push blue you are literally killing yourself from your own stupidity. I feel no guilt if people die from that.

Or they're people wanting to believe in the basic goodness of humanity

Which might be the same thing

I feel like most kids would pick Red. Throw in enough selfish people, people who just hate other people, and people who don't understand the dilemma and you're probably not reaching 50% blue.

Most people will probably see this as:
Press Red: 0% chance of dying
Press Blue: Non-zero chance of dying

And you're hoping most people will look past that, and press Blue.

Prisoner's dilemma has no statistics in it at all, which is the whole point of this question. If there were no statistics involved here, there's not even a question, it's unambiguously red every time.

Also the whole point of the prisoner's dilemma is that betraying is the only rational option. You need total cooperation to have a downside in order for it to be prisoner's dilemma.

I'm not interested in the specifics of what makes something prisoner's dilemma or not but yes I think that was just agreeing with me in more words (one of the options has literally no downside regardless of what others pick which throws everything out of wack on what you should expect and what is optimal)

Scale only matters because if you talk theory and get everyone to understand the game everyone just picks red-- this becomes impossible with 8 billion people however.

Like in a room with 10 people where they have time to talk about the game I expect they'll all pick red. Because it has the same benefit of blue in that case but you don't need to trust anyone.

Leonhart4 posted...

Or they're people wanting to believe in the basic goodness of humanity

Which might be the same thing

Choosing faith over logic when the logic is easily provable is stupidity.

redrocket posted...

Given that this choice is being forced upon the entire population of the world, there are going to be millions or even billions of children/mentally ill people picking blue without actually understanding their choice. Not to mention perfectly rational people picking blue for hundreds of possible reasons, even as simple as they just straight up panicked on being forced into such a crazy situation. But congratulations to all the red pickers for convincing yourselves these people dont deserve to live because they were stupid/asking for it.

Would I feel pity that people trusted their lives to something they didn't fully understand, or died because of something out of their control like a mental illness? Yes, the same amount I feel in regular real life when I hear about things like that. Would I feel guilt? No. I'm not the one that set up the system, and I didn't force them to choose an option that could kill them. It literally has nothing to do with my choice at all.

The prisoner's dilemma is the system expecting at least one person to act in self-interest and pick Betray. The only way to beat the system is for everyone to pick Ally.

Leonhart4 posted...

The prisoner's dilemma is the system expecting at least one person to act in self-interest and pick Betray. The only way to beat the system is for everyone to pick Ally.

No, basic prisoner's dilemma means choosing Betray always gives you the best possible outcome in a single choice situation. You're getting into VLR territory that expands past a single choice.

Ashethan posted...

I feel like most kids would pick Red. Throw in enough selfish people, people who just hate other people, and people who don't understand the dilemma and you're probably not reaching 50% blue.

It depends on how it's presented to them, but I would think most kids would pick blue. Maybe not edgy teenagers, but preteens and under? They'll want to pick the nice option that doesn't hurt anyone, and they'll want to believe the rest of humans are nice and will pick that option as well.

And then you also have to factor how many parents will hit blue because they're worried their kids might hit blue to be nice.

Yeah, if you have total cooperation then you just need everyone to pick the same one. And it's true, nobody bears "guilt" for their choice. It's obviously set up by an evil being. You could argue for blue's stats benefiting from humans being squeamish about killing, maybe.

kevwaffles posted...

No, basic prisoner's dilemma means choosing Betray always gives you the best possible outcome in a single choice situation. You're getting into VLR territory that expands past a single choice.

Nah, the system gets what they want when someone picks Betray, too. They're willing to make a compromise to achieve their goal, and the only way they don't achieve it is if nobody betrays anyone.

In prisoner's dilemma, if you knew everyone else cooperated, you would still pick betray because it's advantageous to you. That's the dilemma.

In this question, if you knew everyone else picked blue, you might as well pick blue too. Or rather it doesn't matter what you pick at all. There's no concept of betrayal. It's a purely cooperative game where everyone wants the same thing. The only dilemma is statistical, since you know some significant % will pick the wrong answer.

Leonhart4 posted...

Nah, the system gets what they want when someone picks Betray, too. They're willing to make a compromise to achieve their goal, and the only way they don't achieve it is if nobody betrays anyone.

When you start framing it in these terms you can't ignore that "the system" is far too massive to be significantly affected by the choice.

Edit: If telling them to shove it is more important to you than the consequences, that's a different thing entirely.

kevwaffles posted...

No, basic prisoner's dilemma means choosing Betray always gives you the best possible outcome in a single choice situation.

Not really on topic but it's never made sense to me that the prisoner's dilemma is analyzed in this way. Like the classic set-up will outright state that both people are purely self-interested but A) that's unrealistic, B) it makes the "dilemma" simple instead of a dilemma, and C) it just leads to a stupid situation where "awful result for everyone" is presented as somehow the best and logical option.

I'd pick blue because I'm a bleeding heart idiot.

If I die, I die. Big whoop.

Kenri posted...

Not really on topic but it's never made sense to me that the prisoner's dilemma is analyzed in this way. Like the classic set-up will outright state that both people are purely self-interested but A) that's unrealistic, B) it makes the "dilemma" simple instead of a dilemma, and C) it just leads to a stupid situation where "awful result for everyone" is presented as somehow the best and logical option.

What people think is the optimal strategy is the actual point of the prisoner's dilemma.

Leonhart4 posted...

What people think is the optimal strategy is the actual point of the prisoner's dilemma.

The most unrealistic part is that you'd have the hard numbers to know that Betray was the most optimal choice, and that's the biggest reason it doesn't translate to real life.

kevwaffles posted...

When you start framing it in these terms you can't ignore that "the system" is far too massive to be significantly affected by the choice.

Edit: If telling them to shove it is more important to you than the consequences, that's a different thing entirely.

This is true if you think there's no scenario in which nobody picks Betray because as long as one person does, the system survives.

mcflubbin posted...

I'd pick blue because I'm a bleeding heart idiot.

If I die, I die. Big whoop.

Yeah, the more I think about it, I realize that pushing blue is a true win-win. If I live, cool. If I die, well its on the people that pushed red to deal with the consequences. Have fun, suckers!

Leonhart4 posted...

This is true if you think there's no scenario in which nobody picks Betray because as long as one person does, the system survives.

That scenario explicitly does not exist within the base concept of prisoner's dilemma, nor does the example here provide any reason to believe it applies. Adding other variables to it changes the whole discussion.

Actually I just remembered the real point of the prisoner's dilemma. It's much more subtle than just being selfish or not.

It's that even if both parties were trying to be as selfish as possible, they can't choose the best option for themselves even if they wanted to. They have to go with a bad option, because the good options have a 0% chance of being picked. So they end up taking the 2 year jail option instead of the categorically better 1 year jail option, since the 1 year jail option effectively does not exist. The numbers are specifically chosen to make cooperation impossible due to risk of betrayal.

If you change the numbers around then it's not prisoner's dilemma anymore. For example the Dark Knight situation is not a prisoner's dilemma, since double cooperation was the best option for everyone involved. Double cooperation needs to be worse than single betrayal for it to be the real dilemma.

foolm0r0n posted...

If you change the numbers around then it's not prisoner's dilemma anymore. For example the Dark Knight situation is not a prisoner's dilemma, since double cooperation was the best option for everyone involved. Double cooperation needs to be worse than single betrayal for it to be the real dilemma.

In theory it does apply because The Joker was going to kill them all himself once time expired and Betray was the only means to survive. The bigger reasons it doesn't apply are:

1. The hope Batman would save them (which he did)
2. The fact that whoever pushes the button is actively a murderer no matter how you slice it
3. You have to trust that the Joker didn't lie about who had whose bomb, which is shit he's constantly done throughout the movie.

foolm0r0n posted...

It's that even if both parties were trying to be as selfish as possible, they can't choose the best option for themselves even if they wanted to. They have to go with a bad option, because the good options have a 0% chance of being picked. So they end up taking the 2 year jail option instead of the categorically better 1 year jail option, since the 1 year jail option effectively does not exist. The numbers are specifically chosen to make cooperation impossible due to risk of betrayal.

yeah this is partly what I was getting at in my previous post. makes it an extremely boring thought experiment to me tbh

FFDragon posted...

The options are literally "you always live" vs "you could die"

Yup, this is what it is when it comes down to it.

And part of why I use this same logic is that I figure people are out for self-preservation. If I pick blue and the majority picks red like I expect them to, I die. I think a lot of people picking blue in the poll would actually opt for self-preservation if the situation were somehow reality.

kevwaffles posted...

That scenario explicitly does not exist within the base concept of prisoner's dilemma, nor does the example here provide any reason to believe it applies. Adding other variables to it changes the whole discussion.

It's not explicitly stated, but it can be inferred because somebody is making the offer and they're presumably making the offer for their own benefit, too.

But you're right it doesn't apply to this scenario, but in either case, the choice that benefits the most people is for everyone to cooperate, but it's also unreasonable to expect everyone to do so.

Leonhart4 posted...

It's not explicitly stated, but it can be inferred because somebody is making the offer and they're presumably making the offer for their own benefit, too.

Okay maybe you're denying Detective Cole Phelps his promotion to Homicide. The LAPD will continue on though.

Edit: I just remembered that it doesn't matter how bad you mess up in that game, lol.

Well the other thing is you only need 50%+ to cooperate which makes it possible even if people aren't actually playing the game cooperatively

Red is Selfish
Blue is Selfless

Pushing 100% of either button wins for everyone. Pushing over 50% is still a win for everyone for one button. It can be argued that anyone who picks blue is a moron and deserves to die. But it can also be said that anyone who picks red is a dick and not someone you'd want to regularly associate with.

I picked blue.

BakusaiTenketsu posted...

But it can also be said that anyone who picks red is a dick and not someone you'd want to regularly associate with.

I picked red because I'm not naive enough to think that enough people would legit pick blue. In my experience, most people are dicks. Does siding with them solely for self-preservation make me a dick too? I don't think so.

I would certainly be fine with it if blue won. Just not going to risk my life.

BlueCrystalTear posted...

I picked red because I'm not naive enough to think that enough people would legit pick blue. In my experience, most people are dicks. Does siding with them solely for self-preservation make me a dick too? I don't think so.

Just like picking blue doesn't automatically make someone a moron.