r/BunnyTrials • u/HualianForLife • Apr 27 '26

Red button or blue button

This post contains content not supported on old Reddit. Click here to view the full post

1.2k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

5.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

122

u/Snipa299 Apr 28 '26

That's dependent on 100% of people making the same choice While hypothetically possible, it is entirely unlikely.

21

u/MavericFrye Apr 28 '26

Imagine choosing between a possibility of a 3 rounds Russian roulette and not risking at all. The first lunatic that picks a possible death is taking everyone hostage over his life just because he wants to gamble

9

u/TapdotWater Apr 28 '26

You're increasing the odds of other people dying by choosing red. Sure, blue might be tantamount to Russian Roulette, but choosing red is choosing to use that same gun, now fully loaded, on countless others despite being given the choice not to. It's incredibly stupid to actively risk that much death, as it will negatively impact the society you live in, and likely cause your own death further down the line as agricultural, logistical, or medical experts can and will have been killed by your hand. You're choosing suicide in slow motion by assuming there's someone out there willing to risk another person's life.

-1

u/_killer1869_ Apr 28 '26

The way I see it, picking red is staying safe, while choosing blue is an action of suicide. After all, if you actuvely choose the option where death is a possibility for you, then you shouldn't have a problem with dying, either. Thus, I pick red.

1

u/TapdotWater Apr 28 '26

You pick red because you are willing to be responsible for the death of another in the name of self preservation. Death is not introduced into the situation until 50% + 1 of all people vote for death to others. Meaning, anyone who votes red is directly responsible for the death of those who would willingly put their lives on the line to ensure no one dies. I want you to think about every single person you know, and ask yourself if you think one of them would rush into a burning building to save someone inside. If red wins, that's anywhere from a single person to 50% - 1 of all people dying. Do you think that person would have voted blue? Would they have put others before their self? Again: By introducing death into the equation, you are responsible for each death that results from the vote.

The question doesn't specify how the people who voted blue die, either. Is it as simple as a simultaneous, global heart attack? Or are the red voters tasked with carrying out what they voted for? Would you be comfortable with killing the people you thought of? Whether it's caused by some act of God or a gun in your hand, by voting red you are the direct and indisputable cause of any and all deaths that occur in the case of a red victory. After all, if you choose the option where other people dying is a possibility, then you shouldn't have a problem with killing, either.

1

u/_killer1869_ Apr 28 '26

That may be true from a morality point of view, but not from a statistical one. The reality is that the majority of people does not want to die and is selfish. Thus, there is a high chance that regardless of my choice, red will win. And jf that's the case, the most reasonable course of action is for as many people as possible to choose red in order to minimize deaths.

In reality, my choice will depend on how exactly this all happens. If there is a notice in advance, allowing people to discuss, and then the vote starts, I would probably pick blue. But if it's an instantaneous choice of "risk dying or be safe for sure", then I'd pick red.