Recent Posts

Pages: 1 23 ... 10
1
The Flood / Re: A hypothetical for you
« Last post by maverick on Today at 02:51:04 PM »
Either be trapped on an island for 1 trillion years, or be responsible for the torment of 99 people.

I’d probably just kill myself tbh.
2
The Flood / Re: A hypothetical for you
« Last post by Verbatim on October 27, 2021, 08:23:45 PM »
Second, Verb, you seem to be not understanding that the entire point is that the possibility of one of the 100 condemning you is what constitutes the game theory outcome of it being necessary for you to be that one.
i understand it just fine—everything you're saying is logically sound

i literally just don't like that you used the word "guarantee," because it's simply inaccurate

let's change the scenario so that all 100 people make their choice simultaneously, and that you're part of the group—you, with your supreme knowledge of game theory, mark down the first option as your choice, and against all odds, it's revealed to you that everyone else voted for the second option

what would your reaction be? the way i see it, it's a good thing the option to relinquish your immortality was baked into the hypothetical, otherwise you'd have the biggest fucking egg on your face
Quote
You're for some reason stuck way back at unlikely and impossible
i don't see it as "way back"—i see this question as further along the conversation than what you're pondering, because the root of it is more concerned with the ethics of the situation, which is a fundamentally deeper question than "what's the best strategy to 'win' at this game"

you're trying to play the game to "win" it, because you think reducing your choice down to what produces the "highest self-benefit" is how you "win" a game like this

you're the kind of guy who watches a show like Squid Game for the games and not the message

a more high-minded person could argue that the "best" option would be to put your own personal comfort at stake and be willing to have yourself tortured for all eternity for the sake of keeping your principles, your innocence, or even just maintaining a clean conscience

the way you look at the "game" only applies if you equate making it out alive and unharmed as "winning," which is understandable if incredibly basic and middlebrow
3
The Flood / Re: A hypothetical for you
« Last post by Verbatim on October 27, 2021, 08:08:43 PM »
easy clap
4
The Flood / Re: A hypothetical for you
« Last post by Coomer on October 27, 2021, 08:06:22 PM »
Actually you are the one being obtuse because the difference between unlikely and impossible is so irrelevant to this discussion that there is no reason to bring it up
he used the word "guarantee" wrong, and i carefully explained to him why it was

when someone is wrong, they have to be corrected—it doesn't matter if it's "relevant" (which it is, you're just being your typical dumbass self as usual)
Quote
It's like if I said "you won't spontaneously combust right now" and you said "ah but there is a chance you could"

ok bro you right good job
yes, because if you said that you could NEVER spontaneously combust, then you're missing the point of the word "spontaneously," and that is something that ought to be corrected, because it's bad to be wrong

glad you get it, good job

you have a small peepee lol
5
The Flood / Re: A hypothetical for you
« Last post by Verbatim on October 27, 2021, 07:56:07 PM »
Actually you are the one being obtuse because the difference between unlikely and impossible is so irrelevant to this discussion that there is no reason to bring it up
he used the word "guarantee" wrong, and i carefully explained to him why it was

when someone is wrong, they have to be corrected—it doesn't matter if it's "relevant" (which it is, you're just being your typical dumbass self as usual)
Quote
It's like if I said "you won't spontaneously combust right now" and you said "ah but there is a chance you could"

ok bro you right good job
yes, because if you said that you could NEVER spontaneously combust, then you're missing the point of the word "spontaneously," and that is something that ought to be corrected, because it's bad to be wrong

glad you get it, good job
6
The Flood / Re: A hypothetical for you
« Last post by Coomer on October 27, 2021, 06:09:21 PM »
i'm basically explaining the difference between "unlikely" and "impossible" to you right now, which i don't think i should have to do, so i can only assume you already understand this, and that you're just being semantically imprecise or deliberately obtuse

Actually you are the one being obtuse because the difference between unlikely and impossible is so irrelevant to this discussion that there is no reason to bring it up

It's like if I said "you won't spontaneously combust right now" and you said "ah but there is a chance you could"

ok bro you right good job
7
The Flood / Re: A hypothetical for you
« Last post by Coomer on October 27, 2021, 06:07:18 PM »
Can't wait to torture this idiot for a trillion years while I'm chilling in paradise 8)
which is another thing that separates this from a true prisoner's dilemma in the sense that having the choice-makers be randomly chosen is imbalanced—why should some random person get to choose first over another random person? what's the logic behind that? if i were second in line, and the very first person chose to fuck everyone over, that kinda just throws the whole experiment out the window right off the bat

then again, the closer you model the hypothetical after the prisoner's dilemma, the more you might as well just be thinking about the prisoner's dilemma, where the choices are made simultaneously between just two people

YouTube

^ the most optimal response to the prisoner's dilemma, but only if the "prisoners" (obviously contestants in this case) are allowed to communicate with each other

Here's a thought about individuality and human nature

The only sure way of a happy ending to this dilemma is if everyone held a common understanding with each other. The reason to chose the selfish option is the threat of others doing the same. Now everyone involved could be willing to choose peace but the fact remains that you just don't (and can't) know what others will do. The risk is what drives people to pick the selfish option.

How do we reach an understanding then? We can't. Because we are all individuals, there is simply no way to guarantee people will think like you. And because there is no guarantee, you will always be forced to pick the selfish option. It's almost like a self fulfilling prophecy in a way. If everyone just did the right thing, there would be no need for you to do the wrong thing.

But because there is always risk, people will always be selfish. And there will always be risk because we are individuals. Such is the price of freedom
8
The Flood / Re: A hypothetical for you
« Last post by SecondClass on October 27, 2021, 05:36:05 PM »
are you somewhat happy I came up with this

idk I want to expand what I post about here and even if my hypothetical wasnt compelling at least it led to some activity/discussion here right

I mean I know you still despise me but if you want to see me make more threads in this vein please let me know with a little bit of positive reinforcement if that's not an overstep to ask
9
The Flood / Re: A hypothetical for you
« Last post by dahuterschuter on October 27, 2021, 05:26:28 PM »
Well firstly, yes the entire point of the hypothetical is observing human behaviour.

Second, Verb, you seem to be not understanding that the entire point is that the possibility of one of the 100 condemning you is what constitutes the game theory outcome of it being necessary for you to be that one.  You're for some reason stuck way back at unlikely and impossible for some reason when it has nothing to do with anything I'd said.  The scenario already makes it possible that 1 or more of the hundred condemn you to torment, which is what then triggers the prisoner dilemma action of it being the best choice to sell out everyone else to your own benefit every time.

You only need to arrive at "Is it possible someone does it to me?" to then be moved forward to doing the thing yourself first becoming the best strategy to avoid the negative outcome.  Why you're still way back at the process of determining if it's possible or not when the scenario itself has already gotten past it makes no sense.
10
The Flood / Re: A hypothetical for you
« Last post by Verbatim on October 27, 2021, 03:31:19 PM »
Nah, you can't just ignore the entirety of game theory.
if whatever you think "game theory" means clashes with basic, fundamental things like stochasticity that hard, i think i can

do you deny that if you flip a coin a million times, you COULD get heads every single time? or do you think it's literally impossible for that to happen (you know, instead of just extremely unlikely)
Human behaviour isn't a coin flip.
but this hypothetical doesn't really observe complex human behavior—it observes the choice between a simple binary of options for which there exist compelling reasons to take either, depending on your disposition

we don't know how the islanders are chosen, so we can assume that they'd be chosen randomly

take a random youtube video with at least 100 dislikes, but a like/dislike ratio of 99:1—out of all the people who rated this video one way or the other, let's randomly select 100 of those people

out of those randomly selected individuals, it's very unlikely that all 100 of them voted to dislike the video, but since we already know that 100 people did, we already know that there's a remote possibility of such a thing occurring

it's the same principle here, except rather than using raw data to support my position, i'm essentially using common sense—i'm personally fairly confident that there's more than 100 people on this planet of 7.9 billion who would never have anyone tortured under any circumstances, even if it would grant them immortality

to put it another way, in order to disagree with my position, you would have to believe that the world's population contains less than 100 people who would choose the second option, and that you also just happen to be speaking to one of them—that would be pretty remarkable

knowing that these people exist is enough to say that it isn't guaranteed that someone on that island will vote to fuck everyone over—you can only be 99.99999% sure if you want, but you cannot be 100% sure unless you happen to know all of the people on the island

i'm basically explaining the difference between "unlikely" and "impossible" to you right now, which i don't think i should have to do, so i can only assume you already understand this, and that you're just being semantically imprecise or deliberately obtuse
Pages: 1 23 ... 10