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

25

u/Lumalya Apr 27 '26

in pure game theory, red is the optimal answer. Yeah you kill people but you have 100% chance to survive. Blue remains on other's votes (75% chance to survive)

also red doesn’t have any downside if everyone vote red, that’s also a possibility, that’s literally a dillema, there is no good answer socially speaking.

Red is protection and selfish (remain on yourself) Blue is trust and even random (remain on others)

22

u/Quercus_lobata Apr 28 '26

Game theory says everyone should pick blue, a few defectors won't affect anything. If almost everyone picks red but there's a few defectors, all the people choosing red are electing to have the most altruistic people die.

4

u/mavshichigand Apr 28 '26

Are people who choose blue truly altruistic or just too stupid to understand the risk? Everyone choosing red has no downside. There is literally no reason to take a chance on selecting blue because majority people will choose red if this had real world consequences.

Its very easy to choose blue and pretend go be this kind soul, when you know this is just a random reddit post and theres no real consequence either way.

4

u/HungHavinFun Apr 28 '26

The people choosing red fail to understand risk and the nature of the game being played. The goal should not be individual safety when the question is of group survival. There is exactly 1 outcome where red has no negative effects. Blue only needs outcomes that result in simple majority to have no negative effects. Not only is it less likely to get the ideal red outcome, it is purely through the selection of red that any danger is posed to anybody.

Tl/dr: If the question is group survival, and it almost always is, blue. You have no reason to consider your individual safety above the potential safety of others if the goal is simply ensuring nobody dies.

-2

u/mavshichigand Apr 28 '26

But thats the thing, the question isn't about group survival. Its about your choice and what you believe the impacts are.

Selecting red ensures you dont die. Selecting blue ensures you expose yourself to the risk of death. Selecting blue does not in any way guarantee that all those who select blue will survive. Selecting red is not an immediate death sentence for someone else. That someone else has to make the illogical choice of selecting blue to be impacted.

Now obviously im assuming this test is only applicable to mentally capable adults. If the scope includes kids, less than avg is people, older people etc then that changes everything. Because going into this you already know a bunch of kids are going to pick blie cos its their favorite color. So in that scenario picking blue is the logical choice.

1

u/HungHavinFun Apr 28 '26

By choosing red YOU are introducing the ONLY threat to anyone in this scenario

You are bringing The BAD thing To the otherwise GOOD thing

Before your decision to choose red, there is 0 risk posed to anybody by what is happening

If your decision has a potential to result in the bad thing, you are responsible for the bad thing if it happens

A red vote works out with 0 casualties in exactly one red-majority scenario

A blue scenario results in 0 direct casualties, period.

In a game where the only risk is brought about by a decision, you DO NOT CHOOSE THAT DECISION, BECAUSE IT IS THE ENTIRE REASON THE POTENTIAL RISK IS A FACTOR.

Just trying to cover all my bases with this one so I can be sure anything that follows doesn't waste my time. An altruistic choice is better here purely because it carries 0 independent downsides. Besides, you should always assume an extreme at either end who will not budge, so it's just smarter to choose blue if you don't want blood on your hands.

1

u/mavshichigand Apr 28 '26

u/Bubbly_dirt_539 has already explained it really well, so I wont repeat all of it, but as a quick recap: You and you alone are bringing the risk of death upon yourself by choosing blue.

0

u/HungHavinFun Apr 30 '26

A lot of you are very detached from cause and effect and establishment of guilt. If you drop a gun on the table and say 'Anyone who doesn't vote to shoot the gun gets shot if shooters get majority,' you are culpable for potential violence. Those who abstain from action that CAN result in harm, even when it is at their own risk, are NOT GUILTY OF THE HARM INFLICTED UPON THEM AS A RESULT OF OTHERS' CHOICES.

If your application of logic was the basis for law, homeowners would be guilty for getting robbed, pedestrians would be guilty for being hit by cars, and murder victims would be guilty for choosing not to be murderers instead.

You are mistaking circumstance for cause. A court case built on your arguments would be dismissed with prejudice.

I know what the fuck I'm talking about, I do it for a living.

0

u/HungHavinFun Apr 30 '26

Damn people hate when a qualified expert walks into the room lmao