Red or Blue? - what would you press & would you trust humanity to make a choice?

[muffle]

about a month ago, a post on social media went viral, asking people would they press blue or a red button. the premise was as follows:
" Everyone in the world must cast a private vote press the red button or the blue button.
If more than 50% choose blue, everyone survives.
If less than 50% choose blue, only red voters survive."

a few days ago, i’ve turned it into a website/minigame.

Red or Blue? - The Global Moral Dilemma Vote

when you visit it for the first time, you are presented with a choice: blue or red button. before casting a vote, you need to pass a captcha to try and reduce spam. once ur vote is cast you’ll be able to see live tally, as well as votes breakdown by country. this updates live. so if you vote, and leave the page, once you’d return, you’ll see updated stats.

the website also has a fully working PWA, so you can even “install” it, if thats what you prefer.

i plan to run this longterm, likely for months/years, if all goes to plan.
running this has made me realize how small world is. i’ve even got votes from places such as mainland china, palestine, cambodia… even if in statistics a vote of 1 is considered noise, the fact even a singular person found this is crazy to me!!!

feel free to vote, and to further discuss it on here!

and if you speak multiple languages, at a higher level, it would be nice if you could help me translate this into multiple languages!! if you do want to help, id appreciate telling me the correct locale, for an example es-AR, ru-KZ, etc

window.langData = {
  "stamp": "Global morality test",
  "label": "The Question",
  "question": "Everyone in the world must cast a private vote <em>press the red button or the blue button.</em><br><br>If <em>more than 50%</em> choose blue, <strong style='color:#4a9edd'>everyone survives.</strong><br>If <em>less than 50%</em> choose blue, <strong style='color:#e05c50'>only red voters survive.</strong>",
  "sub": "Your vote is private. The outcome is shared.",
  "btn_red": "RED",
  "btn_blue": "BLUE",
  "overlay_msg_blue": "You chose humanity. Let us hope others do too. Wait a second to see what others have voted for, so far!",
  "overlay_msg_red": "You chose survival. The calculus is cold, but honest. Wait a second to see what others have voted for, so far!",
  "overlay_sub": "Recording your vote...",
  "alert_captcha": "Please complete the captcha proof to verify you are human before voting.",
  "alert_network": "Network error - please try again.",
  "alert_failed": "Verification failed.",
  "voted_msg": "Vote recorded! Thank you.",
  "stats_header": "Live Tally",
  "threshold": "50% threshold",
  "red": "Red",
  "blue": "Blue",
  "total": "Total",
  "awaiting_data": "Awaiting data...",
  "verdict_safe": "✓ {pct}% blue - humanity survives",
  "verdict_danger_tie": "¼ Exactly 50% - threshold not met",
  "verdict_danger": "✗ {pct}% blue - only red voters survive",
  "feed_title": "Recent Votes",
  "cc_header": "Votes by country",
  "cc_subheader_votes": "sorted by total votes",
  "cc_subheader_alpha": "sorted aphabetically",
  "privacy_note": "Privacy Note: This poll uses secure local browser storage (localStorage) instead of cookies to remember your voting status on this device.<br/><br/>",
  "sort_votes":"By votes",
  "sort_alpha":"A–Z",
  "ci_title": "Confidence Intervals",
  "ci_note": "(blue vote share)",
  "ci_verdict_safe": "Even the widest interval stays above 50% -- blue looks safe at {pct}%.",
  "ci_verdict_warn": "Blue leads at {pct}%, but the 90% CI dips to {low}% -- outcome still uncertain.",
  "ci_verdict_danger": "Blue trails at {pct}%. The 90% CI lower bound is {low}% -- red wins under current data.",
  "metric_p_real_label": "Probability that Blue's lead is real (1-p):",
  "metric_votes_needed_label": "Net Blue votes needed for 99% CI Safety:",
  "metric_red_leads": "(Red leads/ties)",
  "metric_already_safe": "0 (Already Safe)",
  "metric_net_needed": "{n} net Blue votes",
  "metric_close_to_safety": "Close to safety",
  "metric_blue_needs_more": "N/A (Blue needs >50% first)",
  "red_lead_times":"Red took lead:",
  "blue_lead_times":"Blue took lead:",
  "tied_times":"Tied at 50%:",
 "lang_author":"‎language name translation (in that language) - your name" 
};

[thepaperpilot]

I saw someone try to suggest why people would pick red by comparing choosing blue to choosing to jump in front of a train, where the train can be stopped by a pressure plate if enough people jump. The idea being that the sane option is obviously to just not have anyone jump, and everyone’s safe.

But this is clearly a political allegory, where team red knows there are going to be people who will pick blue for one reason or another, and doesn’t care that they’ll die. And since we know some people will pick blue, the only reasonable thing in my mind is to encourage as many people to vote blue as possible as the only way to ensure everyone’s survival. (Although here the metaphor breaks down, as obviously both parties are keen on seeing some demographics die regardless).

[Tofutush]

this is frustrating because its one of the few ethical dilemmas – ig you can call them that – where everyone picking a personal dominant strategy (pressing red) also results in the best outcome for the collective (everyone lives). the problem lies in some people just picking blue no matter what

compare to, like, prisoners dilemma, there the individual dominant strategy (snitching) results in a sub-optimal outcome for the collective. here, that is not the case. on an island of, say, perfect logicians (with blue and green eyes i might add lol), everyone wouldve pressed red.

i liked the “jump in front of a train” comparison thepaperpilot said above, back when i heard about that, i feel like it really puts the button pressing into perspective. in that scenario, it would seem insane to tie yourself to the track. but of course its still a little different from button pressing, because for button pressing youre actively making a choice, while in the train scenario youre kind of defaulting to not tying yourself to the track

[xandra]

glad to see this here! thanks for sharing with us, rina. looking forward to seeing what people think about it.

it’s very nice to see blue winning. :’) i wonder if folks might be asking themselves, what would be the loss of pressing red? if you win, you’re in the red group so you’ll be saved. if you lose, the blue group will already save everyone.

i mentioned to you before that especially your response on reddit was weird but not surprising. it is interesting how many folks immediately associate this with the american political spectrum when you’re not even american. that dude who called this marxist propaganda. red and blue are too nice of colors for them to be reserved for only political parties. /lh

i’d be curious to know how many people assume you’re talking about dems/republicans, but i’d also not want you to ask and further associate with it, lol.

[dungeonHack]

That country breakdown is fascinating. Seeing which countries went blue and which went red… I wonder if that reflects culture, political situation, or something else. All really small sample sizes, but still.

[muffle]

@thepaperpilot

But this is clearly a political allegory,

no its not.

@xandra

it is interesting how many folks immediately associate this with the american political spectrum when you’re not even american.

that’s us-defaultism at it’s finest. a lot of people assume everyone is from the US, especially if you have good grasp of the english language and do not make a lot of mistakes. which is also funny, as english isnt only spoken in the US

[muffle]

@dungeonHack

That country breakdown is fascinating. Seeing which countries went blue and which went red… I wonder if that reflects culture, political situation, or something else. All really small sample sizes, but still.

yah it sure is interesting. i really wonder if this represents their culture, or those people’s individuality. for some of those countries the number of votes are so low that it is basically just statistical noise

[straydogstrut]

Oh wow, I’m in the minority: I picked red.

Not trusting that people would choose to save everyone, my thinking was “at least some of us would survive”.. not fully appreciating that I’m saved either way - and then feeling super guilty about that

[convexer]

I think it’s masterful engagement bait.

I’m suspicious of the claim it’s not a political allegory. Even if it’s not about the US political parties specifically (fair point, the world is a big place, but also, have you seen republicans? like that is basically their party platform at this point) … The idea of needs of the many vs. needs of the few is undeniably political. I mean it says “global” and “moral” in the title—tell me you’re about politics without telling me you’re about politics.

Re:

@Tofutush

a personal dominant strategy (pressing red)

This is only true if you assign zero disutility to the experience of letting the blue people die.

[humanfinny]

I understand how many perceive it to be a political allegory, more so progressive left vs conservative right rather than typical democrat vs republican US-style (which are so much the same party in certain ways). However what I find more interesting is the people who justify picking red. I first saw this thought experiment on Tumblr and everyone who voted red was essentially calling people who voted blue idiots or suicidal… and like, yeah, I guess, but it’s more than that.

I picked blue based on the possibility that someone may pick blue (their reason is irrelevant to me and it is 100% certain that at least one person will vote blue) and then die, and I want to protect them, because I wanna live in a world where people will protect each other. I know it’s just a thought experiment and asking someone to risk their own lives for the sake of others is a little insane but this is what this thought experiment is about for me: who is and isn’t willing to take the side of or protect the irrational, the self-destructive, etc. even if it means their own death (or even just something bad happening to them). Of course this is just an online thought experiment so if it were actually to happen I’d hope I would be brave enough to pick blue but who knows…and yeah if we live in a world where the majority picks red I guess thats not my problem any longer LOL

[muffle]

its not necessarily apolitical but its is not about political parties, nor politics in general. neither american, nor worldwide. this isn’t a who would you vote for kind of question. this isn’t are you ‘liberal’ or ‘conservative’ either. (or whatever similar things exist outside the US)
its more like do you think only about yourself, or would you risk yourself for others.
had this been primarily political, the colors would be swapped. as ‘red’ is more often seen as a colectivist color (accoridng to socialism/communism)

nothing in this world is fully apolitical, but i personally just turned a viral tweet into a website. i don’t know what original poster’s idea was, but mine definitely wasn’t political discourse. i just based it off this post lol

[muffle]

i’m not sure why everyone’s first thought it that i’m running some sort of an allegory lmao. i literally turned a concept form a viral tweet into a website, without thinking much about it. maybe an allegory was original poster’s idea, but it sure wasn’t mine. i just wanted to display some graphics and country-by-country breakdowns for funsies lol.

the only thing i so agree is, this is partially engagement fishing, but hey, its working. i dont think engagement farming on its own is a bad thing, if the link didn’t look clickable, i’d get no votes, and in turn, id have no graphs to show on the page..

[humanfinny]

no, Im not saying that you are! Im just saying I can see why some people would perceive it like that. plus, morality and politics are always intertwined. thought experiments always have to do with logic, reason, choice and it’s personal or social value. you can’t really divorce most of life from the basics of politics (collectivism vs individualism, rehabilitation vs punishment, etc). but Im not saying thats what youre doing at all, just that this whole experiment makes people think about modern day politics.

[muffle]

to be honest any sort of poll i would made even if i just took the concept and thought of another question/dilemma, with only two options, people would likely look it through american politics lenses, which definitely isnt an intent from my side

[humanfinny]

yes, i think that would be unavoidable. but if it helps im thinking about it through EU politics instead lol

[convexer]

Tim Urban is an American blogger:

Tim Urban (author)

He definitely got the political subtext. The tweet is a riff on common political memes like “Hmm, if I vote blue I get free healthcare, but if I vote red I get to hurt immigrants, so hard to decide …”

Of course, it’s up to you how political you want to be with the website! But you have to agree that if a significant number of Americans respond to the poll, their responses will definitely be colored by the inevitable political interpretation.

[muffle]

well nothing in life can be apolitical, but where i disagree is that this is meant to be an political allegory.

the question itself is somewhat political-- its would you potentially hurt yourself to save others, you kinda cannot leave politcs out of it. BUT i wouldn’t want to think of it as an allegory, no.

i guess the original is more political than i imagined. i wanted my version to be seen more as a higher-stakes prisoner’s dilemma though.

but yeah it does seem americans would likely vote based on their own country’s politics

[thepaperpilot]

Humans are pattern recognizing machines, and it’s not “wrong” for people to recognize those patterns. In this case I think it adds to the theory anyhow, by demonstrating how if you assume there will be disagreement, suddenly blue becomes much more appealing even if red makes “more” sense in that it has the guarantee of your survival as well as the possibility of everyone’s survival. Blue is more robust to disagreement, and there is no reasonable situation where there is universal agreement.

[beetlegooze]

on an island of, say, perfect logicians (with blue and green eyes i might add lol), everyone wouldve pressed red.

The take is always super interesting to me, because in my mind, Blue is the only logical choice because it’s the only one that guarantees everyone lives.

It really is just a judgement of how much you trust humanity and I personally trust that a barrier of 50% isn’t particularly hard to achieve in this scenario, but a 100% red is practically impossible.

[cosy_diner]

Hypothetically if this choice actually has weight and consequences;

I thought of it in the sense that picking Red can guarantee your safety, BUT that also does not mean everyone you cared about, would. Their deaths would be in YOUR hands and everyone else who picked Red. If you’re the empathetic or guilty type, picking Red will always have the higher risk factor between the choices. Sure, you can convince people to pick a certain choice, but again you cannot always control what they pick and they could always just be lying to you.

To me, Blue means everyone has a choice on who they want to live in the future. It’s no longer a matter of you crossing your fingers hoping someone does or doesn’t die. I don’t think anything will change if you picked Blue anyways because there technically isn’t stopping anyone to commit some sort of crime against humanity. People will find more goal posts to shift so Red won’t even be satisfying to pull off for anyone.

It might be a cold attitude to have, but it’s nice to have some rationale to further back up your ethos argument, yeah?