Red is the obvious choice from a self-preservation perspective but not a moral one. You're seeing here in these comments that there are lots of blue pressers; they would all die. This creates a snowballing incentive to push blue: people dying is bad.

There's several reasons why someone might make the "wrong" choice, and reaching 50% + 1 on blue is way easier than reaching 100% on red. And sure enough, the polls I've seen have shown blue with a majority every time.

▲

troglodytetrain 8 hours ago | parent [-]

Its an interesting psychological test. Because, no, I don't agree, red is the moral choice and also the most rational.

Those who think the population is too stupid to behave in regards to their own self preservation might choose blue in an attempt to 'save everyone' and kill themselves.

Only one singular choice has zero risk of death, and its red. Everyone chooses red and we all survive.

▲

enoint 8 hours ago | parent [-]

Red does have risk: you’d be left in a world without things produced by the blue pressers. I suspect that’s red's food, water and shelter.

edit: specified who

▲

throwaway173738 7 hours ago | parent [-]

If you think most farmers, construction workers, factory workers, and so on would press blue then you might want to actually get to know some of them and put them to this test. I don’t think many of them would willingly risk death on something so trivial as a button press. I’ve seen guys get rescued from falling off roofs but as written I don’t think many of the guys running to get their buddy out of his harness and on the ground are going to pick blue if you present it in a really clinical sense.

	▲	enoint 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Sure, I can ask around. It's a drought here, so we're looking for things to talk about. It's not really about the numbers, though, is it? The red button future is now a mix of game theoreticians, Objectivists, and people who like the color red. The proportion of parasites is up.