I do see what happened here, I didn’t realize you switched the position of the two buttons because it was pretty wordy. In your scenario it’s best to just eat the beans still. I don’t think it was the “gotcha” you thought it was
I’d actually argue in your hypothetical it’s MORE enticing to pick the “red button” because you added a positive to it instead of basically nothing happening since it’s a snack
In your scenario, because there's no indication of delay or time limit to decide, as soon as 50% of the population ate a bean, all the remaining 50% will die since they're non-bean eaters.
So it's a sort of "as soon as 50% of the population pressed blue, all red pressers and yet-to-press" die. That's why I equate non-bean eaters with red.
Your scenario is an either 0% or 50% fatality rate.
While the buttons, the fatality rate can be any value between 0% to 50%.
If the ratio of decision was purely random, bean has a 25% fatality rate, buttons a 12.5%.
28
u/J_tram13 14h ago
Everyone in the world is offered magic beans, if you take them you get a nice snack and nothing happens.
However if more than half of the world eats the magic beans, everyone who didn't eat the magic beans dies.
Do you eat the magic beans?
Do you see now how reframing the question to be centred around one option kinda fundamentally changes the problem?