Advanced Trolly Logic
-
@xaade said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
You're armed with a gun and only one bullet, and you enter a gas station.
You see a man with a knife threatening another man. They're both behind the counter and claim to be the owner.
If you do nothing, the armed man will kill the unarmed man. If the surviving man was the criminal, they will also steal from the store, then attack you, and you shoot them. Either the criminal dies, or 2 people die but you survive.
You can also shoot and kill one of the men. If you shoot the armed man, but the unarmed man was the criminal, they will grab the knife and attack you, and you're now unarmed. Either you and the store owner survive, or only the criminal survives.
I'd shoot myself and therefore no longer feel responsible.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
@lolwhat said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
But hey, we kids kept occupied - and we didn't have school, either!
No power? No video games? Impossible!!!1!1!
My
is showing, certainly.
-
@lolwhat said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
@Karla said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
Upstate NY had an ice storm during the 1990/1991 winter, many places lost power for more than a week.
I know this is a bit of a necro, but I'm responding anyway, so nyah.
Can confirm. March of '91. I grew up (and my parents still live there) not that far from where you did, on the edge of the 'burbs at the time. We had no power for at least four days. Mom was bailing the sump pump by hand every so often to keep it from flooding the basement. Dad was a higher-up in the county's public works agency, so for at least a week, he was working extra hours coordinating efforts between his crews, various cities and towns, utilities... It was tough. But hey, we kids kept occupied - and we didn't have school, either!
I was here in NYC for college. I still had school but couldn't understand why no one would answer the phone when I called home.
-
-
@Gąska said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
@xaade said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
You're armed with a gun and only one bullet
If you do nothing, the armed man will kill the unarmed man.
A very good modern interpretation of the trolley problem. Just like the original, it relies completely on an absolutely implausible situation that requires a zillion coincidences to occur at the same time. This one is especially interesting because it requires the criminal to be psychic and know there are no more bullets.
Child be a liberator pistol?
-
-
This post is deleted!
-
-
@boomzilla you're cycling - check your entropy pools.
-
-
@No_1 The solution round here (and across much of the rest of Europe too) was simple: you have to put in a coin to get a shopping cart out of the store, and get that coin back when you return it. If you don't put it back, someone else can get your coin.
-
@dkf For some reason, they scrapped that system here and the coin slots have been disabled on the carts that had them.
-
@Atazhaia Here they disabled it early during covid, but they're active again now.
Also, pre-Euro, these only accepted a single denomination (ƒ1,-). Post-Euro, they accept €0,50, €1,-, and €2,-. This makes it more likely you have a suitable coin in your wallet, however it also makes it more difficult to pass on a cart you're done with to someone else who needs one (since they need to check for a matching coin).
-
@dkf said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
The solution round here (and across much of the rest of Europe too)
That's europoor nanny states, removing all freedom and responsibility, and making you pay for it at the same time
-
Has anyone posed the problem using a Shabbat switch?
There is a trolley careening down a track towards five people.
There is a side track with only one person.
There is a switch that will move the trolley to the side track, but it was implemented using a randomizer that will cause it to fail sometimes, leaving the trolley to continue on the original track.Do you throw the switch?
-
@djls45 I really thought you were going another way with that hypothetical situation: there is a switch that moves the trolley to an empty side track, but it's Shabbat and the switch will also ignite a fire.
-
@Zecc That is a somewhat interesting variation, but it's already trivially answered. Judaism allows for breaking of Shabbat if a life is in danger, so igniting a fire to save the people on the main track is perfectly fine.
-
@PleegWat said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
@Atazhaia Here they disabled it early during covid, but they're active again now.
Also, pre-Euro, these only accepted a single denomination (ƒ1,-). Post-Euro, they accept €0,50, €1,-, and €2,-. This makes it more likely you have a suitable coin in your wallet, however it also makes it more difficult to pass on a cart you're done with to someone else who needs one (since they need to check for a matching coin).
Many supermarkets provide special branded "coins" for the carts for free.
It sort of defeats the whole idea, but opens up a possibility for $profit.
-
@nerd4sale What it ends up at, is that the deposit isn't really a coin of any particular value.
The deposit is the convenience of having a coin which you can use as deposit next time.
-
@djls45 said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
@Zecc That is a somewhat interesting variation, but it's already trivially answered. Judaism allows for breaking of Shabbat if a life is in danger, so igniting a fire to save the people on the main track is perfectly fine.
It's called
Pikachu FrilishPikuach nefesh
-
@djls45 said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
it was implemented using a randomizer that will cause it to fail sometimes, leaving the trolley to continue on the original track.
Do you throw the switch?Yes. If it results in more death, God was feeling killy right then.
-
@Karla said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
It's called
Pikachu FrilishPikuach nefeshIf there is a choice between a Jew and a Gentile who are equally qualified, and there is clearly plenty of time to decide, it is preferable that the Jew provide the assistance
So let me get this straight: it is preferable for the Jew to break the laws of their own faith than the person who doesn't follow the same faith?
If a medical emergency is known or suspected that warrants placing a phone call rather than transportation in a motor vehicle, the telephone may be used. If the situation has a lower level of urgency, the receiver shall be removed and the buttons pressed in an unusual manner (e.g., by using the elbow or the knuckles, or a pencil).
I think my thoughts on this would be better placed in the Garage, so let's leave it at that.
-
@Zecc said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
@Karla said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
It's called
Pikachu FrilishPikuach nefeshIf there is a choice between a Jew and a Gentile who are equally qualified, and there is clearly plenty of time to decide, it is preferable that the Jew provide the assistance
So let me get this straight: it is preferable for the Jew to break the laws of their own faith than the person who doesn't follow the same faith?
As far as I can tell, the idea is to discourage use of religious observance as an excuse to not provide aid.
-
@Zecc said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
So let me get this straight: it is preferable for the Jew to break the laws of their own faith than the person who doesn't follow the same faith?
If a medical emergency is known or suspected that warrants placing a phone call rather than transportation in a motor vehicle, the telephone may be used. If the situation has a lower level of urgency, the receiver shall be removed and the buttons pressed in an unusual manner (e.g., by using the elbow or the knuckles, or a pencil).
Preserving life is the most important action. And that means
anyone, ones-elves and othersanyone, oneself, and others.I think my thoughts on this would be better placed in the Garage, so let's leave it at that.
Possibly, but the law is simple, help life succeed no matter that law being broken or the background of the person they are helping.
Jews can donate organs that can save a life but ones that help a life (cornea). Jews can received an artificial heart made from pig, it is will save their life.
If the powers that be would prefer this discussion in the lounge, I have no objection.
-
@Karla said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
ones-elves
One should save the lives of all elves, not just one's own.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
@Karla said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
ones-elves
One should save the lives of all elves, not just one's own.
Yeah, sorry don't I know know how to say that correctly and didn't feel like looking it up because
.Please
me.
-
@Karla That's a good question. And the answer is perhaps one of the most arbitrary and
ic in all of English grammar.Oneself is a reflexive pronoun; think of it as a gender neutral replacement for himself or herself. One must think for oneself.
One's self refers to one's own self, where self in this context is only permitted to be used for your psychological or spiritual self, not your physical self. Meditation is good for one's self.
If you remove the restriction that self must be spiritual or psychological, they become mostly interchangeable. But the grammar
s are most insistent that you must not do that.With that in mind, I think you want oneself. The plural, oneselves, is according to languageandgrammar.com, a grammar error. The plural isn't necessary because, even though you are speaking to a group of people, each individual in the group can only save his or her own self (and in this case it's not necessary to limit self to the psychological sense (Why? Because I said so.)) and others. You could tell the group as a whole to save themselves, but each one individual must save oneself.
Confused? Me, too. I definitely haven't had enough caffeine to deal with this shit on a Saturday morning.
-
ahem
"ourselves"?
-
@HardwareGeek elves is bastards is bastards is elves, let 'em die
-
@Arantor Yeah, that could work in this context, too.
-
@Karla said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
If the powers that be would prefer this discussion in the lounge, I have no objection.
although this isn't in any fashion anti-semitic or parochial, I suspect you'll be forgiven, what with living in New York.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
@Karla said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
ones-elves
One should save the lives of all elves, not just one's own.
And that means
anyone, ones-elves and othersanyone, oneself, and others.I think in my head I was thinking:
And that means
-
anyone
-
one
selves.
e.g. anyone's self and oneselves <with a red squiggly I chose one of the suggestions>
So spellcheck screwed me.
-
-
-
Amortized over time, at least for the smallest infinite cases, it seems, perhaps counterintuitively, best to choose the largest possible number of possible targets for the trolley.
Each person will therefore gain a larger number of people killed before them and therefore live, proportionately, longer than they would when the trolley is aimed at fewer people.
By the same logic, all people being killed by the trolley will likely be happier about it the more there are of them.
If the trolley can only move at finite speed, this becomes an even better approach.
and if it goes faster than that everyone was killed by the plasma shock anyway or can't breathe
-
@topspin ah yeah, that one. I can't believe Zwilnik's proof isn't better known.
-
-
-
@LaoC no. This reduces to his prior conditions.
-
@Gribnit said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
@LaoC no. This reduces to his prior conditions.
The struggle itself ... is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy.
-
@Gribnit said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
@LaoC no. This reduces to his prior conditions.
Like being a smartass?
-
@topspin said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
The struggle itself ... is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus h
appypertrophy.
-
-
@Atazhaia said in Advanced Trolly Logic:
@dkf For some reason, they scrapped that system here and the coin slots have been disabled on the carts that had them.
The training of the population was complete. You rarely see any carts standing sadly in the middle of the parking lots even if there is no monetary reason to put it back.
Also, everyone had plastic fake coins for them, and cash is pretty much gone so there wasn't a yuuge reason to keep it around anymore.
-
https://neal.fun/absurd-trolley-problems/
Some fun ones
More. I couldn't resist.
-
@Zecc Nice.
I made the wrong choice by mistake a couple of times. So it's probably higher than it should be.
-
-
-
@Zecc I didn't initially realise it was a game (sort of) rather than just a list of fun variations. Nice.
:
If it's a "copy," even though it might be the "original" one (whatever that means), it's still a copy, so let it splat!The cat level is easy, it's highly unlikely that the cat is on its 9th life already, so splat it goes.
-
-
@Vault_Dweller I'm not entirely convinced that this definition doesn't imply that it's one of many identical specimens (all "copies" of a record are exactly identical), nor that there is a "master" from which "copies" are made.
But yeah, ok, maybe it's the actual original one on the tracks. You win.
That actually does a good job of showing the absurdity of the
originalcopy (?) problem, in that it's far too removed from anything real to be able to take a decision that has any meaning in the Real World. The original of the Mona Lisa will never be on a track, with 5 people on the other track, so we can argue ad nauseam about it but it always remains so purely intellectual that nobody will ever reach any conclusion of any value.It's fun as a philosophical problem (which is what it is originally!) but the hype it got as some sort of way to learn anything about the real world is just dumb.
Pikuach nefesh - Wikipedia
2:
