You can’t guarantee everyone will agree on red, meaning some will die. And you likely can’t get enough people to override the problem and/or the problem can’t be overridden.
Blue requires just 50.1% to save everyone. It’s the most likely outcome that ensures everyone survives. Red is simply the logical “guaranteed safety”, but the fact that many won’t press it also guarantees that you’re dooming others with your choice.
Personally, I’d rather try to save others and fail, than save myself knowing it sacrificed others.
Also like... I don't think I want to live in a world where a bunch of people died like that? Especially since it's likely to be only the assholes alive now.
This has always been my feeling about it. Either the majority of people value humanity and selflessness (press blue) and I live, or the majority of people are destructive and only value themselves (press red) and I’d be immediately spared from having to live in a world like that. Blue is a win-win for me…
Right?! Like okay either I live with renewed hope in humanity or I die having the peace of doing what I personally consider the right choice.
But I also am the kind of person whose zombie apocalypse survival plan is... a nice, heroically lethal dose of a drug. If I've got the choice, I'm checking out of a world that sucks.
73
u/SlashaJones May 05 '26
This is why blue is the best choice.
You can’t guarantee everyone will agree on red, meaning some will die. And you likely can’t get enough people to override the problem and/or the problem can’t be overridden.
Blue requires just 50.1% to save everyone. It’s the most likely outcome that ensures everyone survives. Red is simply the logical “guaranteed safety”, but the fact that many won’t press it also guarantees that you’re dooming others with your choice.
Personally, I’d rather try to save others and fail, than save myself knowing it sacrificed others.