Anthony

hi~~~

[Anthony @athnylln]

@Aella_Girl Pressing it might raise the global IQ by 15 points, but that means nothing. It's the people at the tail end who actually build civilization.

[Anthony @athnylln]

@Dcmat the most difficult emote to get😰

[Anthony @athnylln]

@avidseries @SwipeWright "appropriate meme"

[Anthony @athnylln]

@cremieuxrecueil This one is closer to the original design.
https://t.co/fp51wUPckT

[Frank Walter Oskar @frnkwltroskr]

@JayExci it's really more like this

[Anthony @athnylln]

@EUhobgoblin @kmh I said it cuts both ways, BY YOUR LOGIC. The fact is, Red doesn’t cause Blue, and Blue doesn’t cause Red. Red is certainty: 100% survival, not a gamble. Blue is the gamble: survival only if it’s greater than 50%. That's the rule
Final word,whoever gambles and loses, it’s on them.

[Anthony @athnylln]

@SebMadeInChina @spiderking232 The rule is: If you press Blue and Blues < 50%, you die. That’s not a default safe option, it’s a gamble with a built‑in death condition.
I figure I’m dealing with someone who can’t even comprehend the rule. 🤡

[Anthony @athnylln]

@EUhobgoblin @kmh Because Blue is the one with the death condition, it’s inherently the risky choice, a gamble, not a guarantee

[Anthony @athnylln]

@EUhobgoblin @kmh Don’t you realize your logic cuts both ways? By your own reasoning, i can say 49% Blue means 49% less Red, which also means 49% less guaranteed survival. So it’s not about who "causes" whom. The real issue is understanding the causal structure itself.

[Anthony @athnylln]

@SebMadeInChina @spiderking232 https://t.co/VhPOoHhVTk

[Anthony @athnylln]

@kmh @EUhobgoblin You’re confusing several things.
"Choosing red means less blue" , that's not how causation works.
1. It assumes Blue is the safe default and Red somehow ruins it. That's backwards thinking.
2. Everyone votes privately, no one is choosing in reaction to the outcome.
(1/2)

[Anthony @athnylln]

@EUhobgoblin @kmh https://t.co/yqM67abEWk

[Anthony @athnylln]

@kmh @EUhobgoblin one more point: Correlation =/= Causation, and certainly not moral responsibility.

[Anthony @athnylln]

@kmh @EUhobgoblin one more point: Correlation =/= Causation, and certainly not moral responsibility.

[Anthony @athnylln]

@kmh @EUhobgoblin You’re confusing several things.
"Choosing red means less blue" , that's not how causation works.
1. It assumes Blue is the safe default and Red somehow ruins it. That's backwards thinking.
2. Everyone votes privately, no one is choosing in reaction to the outcome.
(1/2)

[Anthony @athnylln]

@kmh @EUhobgoblin 3. Blue + Red = 100%.That's just how numbers distributed. If Red "reduces" Blue, then Blue equally "reduces" Red. It cuts both ways. Example: I own 10 pets , 8 dogs and 2 cats. It's nonsense to say dog responsible for the cats being a lower percentage. That's just ratios works

[Anthony @athnylln]

@SebMadeInChina @spiderking232 am i wrong?

[Anthony @athnylln]

@kmh @MarcusDAurelius Nice try, you assume Blue is the safe default choice and red ruins it, which is backwards thinking.

[Anthony @athnylln]

@alprog_ Blue, no matter what. Since toddlers vote randomly, I have to press blue or end up with blood on my hands. second, choosing red is exactly why death is on the table. it is the default immoral choice.

[Anthony @athnylln]

@Trad_West_Art The blue button pushers did it.

[Anthony @athnylln]

@Wiiiiiilsooooon @SGrigorevskiy @shane1step @greg23546 Yes, all votes are private. While they don't know the results, but they know for a fact that there is a big rock on top. Still walking under it is a suicide attempt.

[Anthony @athnylln]

@Wiiiiiilsooooon @SGrigorevskiy @shane1step @greg23546 Fair enough. My point is that Blue keeps constructing these concrete examples as if Red somehow caused Blue to fail, something that simply does not exist in the original setup. The voting distribution already determines the outcome, those extra steps they add are redundant.