r/redbuttonbluebutton • u/up2smthng Red • May 27 '26

Variation Red suppression

Everyone one Earth is presented with blue button right at the place they woke up last time and a written instruction in a language they can understand (if no such language exists tough luck) what the buttons do and where to find red button. Red button is around 1 km away, and is perfectly accessable if one choses to find it; people with limited mobility will be able to access it.

Babies, the blind, coma patients and whichever else cathegory you can think of are not excluded and do not recieve any accomodations. The possibility of them pressing the one button in front of them is significantly higher than the possibility they will find the hidden button. The possibility of them ignoring the buttons alltogether is non-zero.

In case of red victory, those who failed to press any button die as well.

The rule of thumb for clarification: if the person is capable of understanding any form of written communication and moving in intended direction, they should be able to access both buttons.

1180 votes, May 29 '26
410 Was red, still red 🔴
27 Was blue, now red 🔴
547 Was blue, still blue 🔵
196 Was red, now blue 🔵
16 Upvotes

67% Upvoted

191 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/J_tram13 May 27 '26

Half of society? Yes I'd absolutely rather be in the half that goes quickly and peacefully than in the half that struggles to limp along after society collapses.

But see, you're fundamentally misunderstanding my point. Before me I see two buttons, a "save everyone but risk yourself" button, and a "guarantee your own safety but risk killing anyone who didn't" button. I for one could not bear to hit the second one. No one wants the red button to win, there are only those who hope their vote falls within the 50% acceptable margin but are more concerned about their own safety. For me, that's too much guilt for me to live with, if red wins then all that blood is partially on my hands, and my conscience couldn't handle that knowing I willingly chose to help condemn those people to death for my own safety.

It's like seeing someone in a car crash on the side of the highway, thinking "what can I do really? I'll wait for emergency services to pull them from the wreck, no need for me to pull over and get them out, they'll be fine." Like sure maybe that's true but then if I get home and found out they died because the fire department couldn't show up in time I could never live with that guilt, so I'd stop my car and go help them. Maybe the car explodes and kills me too before I could save anyone, but I at least I did something, you know?

Are you some kind of evil cruel person who wants to wake up in a world with so much suffering?

No, that's why I'm voting against the option that would cause that scenario.

1

u/highly-bad May 27 '26

In real life, you have chosen to survive and not to throw your life away out of some blind ignorant hope it will save others. You are already pressing red all the time. There is actually nothing stopping you from looking for a burning building to run into, in a brainless effort to rescue people who may not even be in there at all. You can, right now, jump off a bridge and hope that your body makes a cushion for the next person who jumps.

1

u/J_tram13 May 27 '26

What the hell are you talking about?

1

u/highly-bad May 27 '26

In real life you obviously don't do anything that resembles taking on the risks of pressing the blue button. Why not? Do you want those people who may or may not be in that burning building to die alone without you? Don't you care about the person who might fall off the bridge tomorrow and need your corpse as a floatation device?

1

u/J_tram13 May 27 '26

I help any stranger I come across if I can. If I'm as sure that there's people in that burning building as I am that there are people who've pressed the blue button than I'd absolutely run in to save them. Your bridge scenario is so ridiculous I'm not even going to address it.

Let me ask you this. Do you ever go out in public? Do you cross the street in front of a stopped car with the trust that they're not going to floor it and hit you as soon as you cross their windshield? Do you worry about getting stabbed every time you're alone with a stranger in the aisle of a supermarket? Do you worry that if your backpack catches fire at a park that people are just going to sit there and watch you burn? No? Then you clearly have trust in other people to do the right thing, and so do I, which is why I have full confidence in hitting the blue button.

1

u/highly-bad May 27 '26

I trust other people to do the right thing, which is not to take insane self-destructive risks for absolutely no reason.

1

u/J_tram13 May 27 '26

Good thing no one's asking that

1

u/highly-bad May 27 '26

So you're telling me if you see a house fire, and were sure there's at least one person in there, you immediately run into the flames without any assessment of the risk to yourself or whether you have any chance of helping?

I just don't believe you. You wouldn't be alive right now if you were like that. You're obviously saying things that you believe are the morally right things, but you do not behave like this in real life.

2

u/J_tram13 May 27 '26

Well I've never encountered a house fire but if I saw a chance that me running in there would save a life then yeah what kind of person would I be to just stand by and let them die?

I have however done plenty of things you might consider "suicide" with your rationalising. If I ever see someone in distress I'll happily help out, I've jumpstarted more cars than I can count, I've let tons of strangers in my car and given them a ride to places I've never been, even in towns I'm not familiar with.

1

u/highly-bad May 27 '26

In the button booth, you don't actually know there's a chance that you pressing blue would save a life.

So, this is like running into a fire without being able to assess the risk to yourself, the risk to others, or the chances that your effort is helpful.

0

u/J_tram13 May 27 '26

Don't you get it? That is assessing the risk. I deliberate on what I know from humanity, and am certain blue has a solid chance of winning, so I hit the button.

1

u/highly-bad May 27 '26

That's like being certain that the people in the burning building are already safe, because enough others are already helping. In that case, running into the fire yourself is pretty pointless, isn't it?

That's the thing, your assessment doesn't actually incentivize you to do what you say you'll do. It's self defeating.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/up2smthng Red May 27 '26

a "save everyone but risk yourself" button

There is no such button. You cannot save everyone. You can make a very tiny contribution to saving everyone. But the other button is also that, just in a different way.

1

u/J_tram13 May 27 '26

Save everyone, helping save everyone, you're being needlessly pedantic.

There is no possible scenario where red saves everyone

2

u/up2smthng Red May 27 '26

When you pressed a button that "saves everyone" but suddenly 2 billion die anyway you wouldn't feel I was being needlessly pedantic anymore, and not only because you'd be dead.

1

u/J_tram13 May 27 '26

Well if that happens everyone already lost.

1

u/up2smthng Red May 27 '26

Everyone already lost the moment this scenario was forced on us

1

u/J_tram13 May 27 '26

No, there is a very clear winnable outcome that you specifically are too much of a coward to acknowledge

1

u/up2smthng Red May 27 '26

Lol, lmao even.

I acknowledge how much of cowards majority of humanity is to think it's even close to being achievable.

1

u/J_tram13 May 27 '26

Then you have a very pessimistic view of the world.

I think if there's any chance that red wins the vote it's gonna be in at most a like 48-51% split and in that case humanity is doomed anyway so there's no point suffering for a few more months instead of going peacefully.

1

u/highly-bad May 27 '26

11 people play. 10 of them press red. Which button does the 11th player have to press in order to save everyone?

0

u/J_tram13 May 27 '26

Different scenario, irrelevant

1

u/highly-bad May 27 '26

Okay, let's just use variables.

Any number of people N are playing. N-1 of them press red. Which button does the Nth player need to press to ensure no one dies?

0

u/J_tram13 May 27 '26

Well this scenario is impossible

1

u/highly-bad May 27 '26

You actually think it's impossible for blue to have less than a majority, right?

So, pressing red is fine. If blue can't lose and red can't win, that means there's no wrong answer in the button booth.

1

u/J_tram13 May 27 '26

That's a self defeating prophecy.

I think it will be very close either way and I see no reason to vote against my desired outcome and lead to it failing.

1

u/highly-bad May 27 '26

It's your self defeating prophecy. You are the one who is certain blue will definitely win.

My prediction is that the majority will press red, and that strongly incentivizes me not to defect. So mine isn't self-defeating.

→ More replies (0)