Comment on Recursion

• andrew@lemmy.stuart.fun ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Pretty sure there’s a base case when you run out of people to tie to the tracks.

  source

  • FarceMultiplier@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Except, given finite resources, the tracks would run out before having enough space for 8 billion tied-up people.

    source

    • tetraodon@feddit.it ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      There are 1.3 million km of railroads in the world. At 200km/h, a trolley could travel them in 18 years.

      Rearrange them in a circle and, providing everyone is cooperating, there’s plenty of time to tie 8 billion people to the rails and run them over.

      source
  • FunderPants@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Yes, say there are 2^33 people for illustrations sake, by 33 decisions you (the first puller) are guaranteed to be dead too. At 32 it’s 50/50, the odds increase as the decisions get made. From a self preservation standpoint the best thing you can do to minimize your personal risk is pull the lever. It also happens to kill the fewest other people.

    source
• Deceptichum@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  It’s on them, but it affects thousands or millions of others.

  As such if you can prevent that, and don’t, it’s also on you too.

  source

  • Alexstarfire@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I think that’s bad logic. The choice everyone has is kill or not kill. I can’t be held responsible for someone deciding to pick kill when they have the ability to pick not kill.

    source

    • Deceptichum@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      You’re not responsible for their choice.

      You’re responsible for giving them the choice.

      source
• rockSlayer@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  True, since we’re analyzing a hypothetical ethical question I shouldn’t leave any open assumptions. I made the assumption that at some point, at least one person will have to die, as in I see this trolley problem as a situation where at the end there is no choice and the maximum number of people die.

  source