Post #1754808
2026-04-28 15:18 UTC
I rather like my examples because they iterate. If we don’t cooperate on food this year then we starve next year, so voting red only means one year of selfish life. If we don’t cooperate on water this year then we can try again in a subsequent year, but eventually a drought will wipe us out. Rationalists love to talk about iterated game theory but they’re so hesitant to recognize instances of it!
Replies (1)
-
@Architeuthis@awful.systems 2026-04-28 20:49
I mean it’s so cut and dried you had to invent a disadvantage for pushing the red button. Maybe the catch is that picking red means you are basically ok with offing people who don’t think like you do en masse, even though it’s posited like a dilemma of securing the lives of your family vs giving a chance to hypothetical people who are heavily OCD in favor of blue buttons.