this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2023
831 points (97.4% liked)

Memes

45519 readers
1555 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 154 points 1 year ago (12 children)

Thats actually a really good dilemma if you think about it. Like if everyone doubles it you basically don’t kill anyone. But you’ll always risk that there’s some psycho who likes killing and then you will have killed more. And if these choices continue endlessly you will eventually find someone like this. So killing immediately should be the right thing to do.

[–] [email protected] 44 points 1 year ago (4 children)

At some people you will run out of people to tie to the tracks.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (5 children)

How many branches is that going to take? Just out of interest.

[–] [email protected] 46 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

math checks out. log2(8 billion) ~= 32.9

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's a little more complicated than that. You have to be summing everyone who is still tied to all the previous tracks. It needs to be a geometric sum formula.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You could just move them over whenever someone decides to double it up. That way the person that was going to die alone is doomed to die anyway. 😂

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It'll just be one fewer junctions. 2^n is always one more than the sum of 2^1+...2^(n-1)

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Some day it reaches a person that thinks...

Well, 4 billion people less is better than someone being able to wipe out humanity...

(it would also solve many problems lol)

(and that point would be after 32 people had the choice...)

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

Thanos waiting patiently in line 💀

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is really the only answer. The only thing that makes it "hard" is having to face the brutality of moral calculus

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Now, what if you’re not the first person on the chain? What if you’re the second one. Or the n one? What now? Would you kill two or n knowing that the person before you spared them?

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The thing to do is kill now even if it's thousands. Because it's only going to get worse.

The best time to kill was the first trolly. The second best time to kill is now.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Yes, but it also kinda depends on what happens at and after junction 34, from which point on more than the entire population of earth is at stake.

If anything, this shows how ludicrously fast exponentials grow. At the start of the line it seems like there will be so many decisions to be made down the line, so there must be a psycho in there somewhere, right? But (assuming the game just ends after junction 34) you're actually just one of 34 people, and the chance of getting a psycho are virtually 0.

Very interesting one!

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 60 points 1 year ago (6 children)

You gotta double it until it overflows to negatives, then you end up reviving billions of people!

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago

Then you end up killing more because of massive famine 💀

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

And so you end up driving up food and housing demand, with no guarantee that the revived population can provide to the supply side. :P

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 55 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Continuously double it so that the trolley has as much room as it needs to brake to a complete halt, therefore killing 0 people.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The real questions are, "Who is fueling and piloting the trolly, and can we kill them?"

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Math-wise, it won't take long until they are tied to the track with us and everyone else.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

But it only takes 1 idiot to ruin the whole thing.

[–] [email protected] 41 points 1 year ago

What if I want to be the person down the line?

[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Welcome to climate policy.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That implies that if nobody tries to stop climate change, it'll never destroy the world.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 year ago

If I must kill 1 person or cause even more death, I suppose I'd kill the person responsible for this scenario.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 year ago

Successfully explained climate change

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh, 100%. Fuck the next generation, I mean person.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Double it. Then the other guy will double it, and so on. Infinite loop = no deaths.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And then there's some psycho on round 34 who kills all 8 billion people alive on earth.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago

Loop continues until entire human population tied to track and there's nobody left to pass the switch to. kill the scapegoat on round one and done

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

You would need a crazy low probability of a lunatic or a mass murderer being down the line to justify not to kill one person

Edit: Sum(2^n (1-p)^(n-1) p) ~ Sum(2^n p) for p small. So you'd need a p= (2×2^32 -2) ~ 1/(8 billion) chance of catching a psycho for expected values to be equal. I.e. there is only a single person tops who would decide to kill all on earth.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You don't even need a lunatic or mass murderer. As you say, the logical choice is to kill one person. For the next person, the logical choice is to kill two people, and so on.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (6 children)

It does create the funny paradox where, up to a certain point, a rational utilitarian would choose to kill and a rational mass murderer trying to maximise deaths would choose to double it.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Well what about the fact that after 34 people the entire population is tied to the tracks. What are the chances that one person out of 35 wants to destroy humanity?

Also thing the entire human population to the tracks is going to cause some major logistical problems, how are you going to feed them all?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I just calculated the sum from n=0 to 32 (because 2^33>current global population). And that calculation implies that the chance of catching someone willing to kill all of humanity would have to be lower than 1/8 billion for the expected value of doubling it to be larger than just killing one person.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

Gotta find the person tying everyone to these tracks and take them out

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Seems like exactly what politicians are doing. Pass the problems along to the next one.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago

I say let it go for 33 doublings (2^33 people), and then decide.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago

I was gonna just do the one but they do say it's best to pay it forward when you can.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

Right is the boomer way.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Throw the switch to pass and then sprint ahead 31 spots so I can kill 4 billion people like Thanos.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

People always miss the bigger picture with these things. Why do these trolleys' brakes keep failing? Is it a design flaw in the braking system? Is the maintenance crew severely underfunded? Is it a slippage problem due to improper rail maintenance? It's a shame we can't even organize a work stoppage to sort this out since congress blocked the trolley union from striking...

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Lever half way and it crashes.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Attempting to subvert the thought experiment only makes things worse. The trolley is full of child prodigies, all future geniuses that will cure cancer and solve the world's problems. By sticking the lever halfway you kill all of them. The only way to save the child prodigies is to choose, left or right.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Also interesting: What would you choose here if you were an evil psychopath? (Asking for an acquaintance.)

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Switch the track from the bottom to the top as the train is half way over the switch, causing the train to drift across both rails hitting all three tied up people and the second switch operator.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Kill 1 person. I feel it would be cowardly to pass the buck and risk killing 2.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›