@cat__paws There really isn't "one neat loophole to get away with child murder" in the law, so the rules lawyering the guy's talking about is probably the state, or more specifcally, the prosecution fucking up.
@PowerTrip00@owenbroadcast Fun fact! The earth is actually *less* spherical because it's spinning. The earth bulges a bit at the equator compared to a typical sphere due to the spin.
@BOENSAW Like my first instinct is to have some lightweight software on the frontend that just handles inputs and predicting what the next few frames should look like while it tries to sync with the server for the actual results, but that's just kind of already how online games work
@BOENSAW Now I'm trying to figure out a way for this to genuinely work, and my best ideas are definitely things that would require a huge overhaul of how games are developed, which is it's own massive hurdle, or is just kind of the infrastructure we already have for online games.
@HairyLeggdHarpy I'd ask them to press red. It'd be selfish of me to ask them to risk their own lives for my sake. Which is kind of what you're doing when you press blue anyway.
@kareem_carr To do otherwise isn't actually weighing your life to have the same value as others, it's actually weighing your life as significantly less valuable than everyone else's.
@isnit0 Not really. By picking blue you're needlessly making yourself a hostage. You're putting yourself in danger in the expectations that others will put themselves in danger to save you.
You're creating a dilemma where there otherwise wouldn't be one.
@CuteAndFunnyAlt A) This isn't a repeating game so there's no way to go tit-for-tat
B) There is no mechanism that punishes people for picking red. Only one that punishes people for picking blue. The obvious equilibrium if it was a repeating game would be that everyone chooses red.
@Jimothy48500311@RodSR19@PatrickHeizer Why are you going to go 50/50 on your own death for a 1/8 billion chance your vote turns the tide for your kid who has a 50/50 shot at being ok anyway?
@RepliesAreFree@Misesean1@RedStallion41@AlexGodofsky They can. They also might not. And in that case everyone who voted blue is just a tragedy that didn't have to happen.
And they are risking themselves to a much greater extent than voting red risks others.
You're valuing your life *less than* the lives of others, not the same.
@quantum_geoff Oh, I'm *100%* choosing red in that case. I might decide it is my duty to put myself on the line for the greater good (I personally wouldn't in the original either tbh)
But I *definitely* don't have the right to put someone else in the meat grinder to try and clog it up.
@RepliesAreFree@Misesean1@RedStallion41@AlexGodofsky I did the whole big thread on how valuing my own life in equal measure to everyone else's would lead to the choice red.
It's not virtuistic to doom yourself because others are doomed.
I believe Aristotle would firmly qualify that that is definitely not within a golden mean.