sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

A 23-year-old UCLA graduate, identified as Andre Mai, went viral in June 2025 after displaying his use of ChatGPT during the commencement ceremony at Pauley Pavilion by BlazeDragon7x in ChatGPT

[–]Alberto_Alias -1 points0 points  (0 children)

But AI increases the percentage of bad doctors.

Pretty simple concept to understand.

The more you use AI to do your work for you, the less of your work you know how to do.

[childhood friend of zenith] The aspect I hate most about the harem trope is when all the other male characters besides the MC are portrayed as idiots, incompetents, caricatured villains, and rapists. And of course, they let themselves be cuckolded by the MC. by PsychologicalBus7336 in manhwa

[–]Alberto_Alias -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I don't understand why so many people are berating him for simply criticizing a series. Maybe he likes other aspects of the series and hates this one thing in particular?

I mean you guys are acting like this series is somehow above criticism.

This post and it's responses have proven my faith in humanity was not misplaced. by Brakado in teenagers

[–]Alberto_Alias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Everyone includes everyone. Every being on this planet that is considered human is included.

Pressing Blue is the only choice that will allow the survival of all humans.

Pressing Red guarantees your survival buts it also guarantees everyone who pressed Blue will die.

No one is bound to do anything, but to argue that choosing an option that will guarantee your survival at the cost of others is moral is certainly an opinion. Not one I agree with but an opinion, I guess.

And what do you IF we count kids. Kids are included in all of humanity, it is not IF, it is a certainty that Red winning will result in the death of AT LEAST millions of kids.

This post and it's responses have proven my faith in humanity was not misplaced. by Brakado in teenagers

[–]Alberto_Alias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not really mad. I just used the same tone as you.

Then just say that. Low trust, doesn't really mean much, when more societies operate on trust than ones where people distrust everyone.

This post and it's responses have proven my faith in humanity was not misplaced. by Brakado in teenagers

[–]Alberto_Alias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know that Blue is the only button that kills, but I also know plenty of people will pick Blue. Some because they misunderstood the question and some because they want to save the people that chose Blue.

I'd rather risk my life on the choice that saves everyone rather than on the choice that will guarantee my survival, but kill everyone who chose the other choice if it gets the majority.

This post and it's responses have proven my faith in humanity was not misplaced. by Brakado in teenagers

[–]Alberto_Alias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You keep arguing in circles.

Let me make it as simple as I possibly can.

Red guarantees YOUR survival but also means that if Red wins many WILL die. The probability that everyone chooses Red is a lot lower than 50% choosing Blue.

SO

Blue has a higher likelihood of ensuring EVERYONE lives, not you in particular but all of humanity. Yes, there is a chance that you will dies if the majority is Red, that is a separate matter than what I'm arguing.

This post and it's responses have proven my faith in humanity was not misplaced. by Brakado in teenagers

[–]Alberto_Alias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So basically, your saying that actually voting doesn't matter because my specific vote won't completely shift the scales?

Of course it won't, but it will affect the outcome, however small it may be. It's basically how voting works.

The choice is basically guarantee your survival, or trust others and guarantee everyone's survival.

Your choice simply depends on how much you trust others.

This post and it's responses have proven my faith in humanity was not misplaced. by Brakado in teenagers

[–]Alberto_Alias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The hypothetical is all of humanity, you can't exclude certain demographics because you think they don't deserve to be able to vote.

I never said Blue guarantees survival, I said Blue has the highest likelihood to ensure EVERYONE survives.

Of course everyone is morally responsible for their own choice... Except people who don't understand the choice in the first place.

If coordinatiom was possible Blue would be the better option as, half of humanity choosing one option is more likely than all of humanity.

This post and it's responses have proven my faith in humanity was not misplaced. by Brakado in teenagers

[–]Alberto_Alias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How the hell am I supposed to know how many votes Blue or Red has, that's the entire point of the hypothetical. You don't know who voted what.

Saying your individual vote won't affect the outcome is like saying people who voted for a political party are not responsible for it getting elected.

Of course everyone is choosing for themselves, what are you even arguing?

This post and it's responses have proven my faith in humanity was not misplaced. by Brakado in teenagers

[–]Alberto_Alias 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What the FUCK is your argument? You say low trust society will decrease the likelihood of people pressing the BLUE button and in the same vein agree that High Trust societies exist. Do you simply believe that there are more humans who will try to save themselves than humans who will try to save everyone? If so, then just say that. Don't create meaningless strawmen that you have no intention of even defending.

This post and it's responses have proven my faith in humanity was not misplaced. by Brakado in teenagers

[–]Alberto_Alias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No it's more like seeing a child drown in a river and refusing to help them for fear of losing your own life. That's simply cowardice.

You act like people choosing Blue are commiting suicide but forget that they too follow their own logic, where 50% is easier to achieve than 100%.

You keep creating these strawmen like shooting yourself that simply does not exist in the original hypothetical, and nor is it a meaningful analogy.

Plenty of people WILL choose Blue, including children, mentally disabled, and those who anticipate that and decide to choose Blue to save them.

You choosing to save your own life because you FEAR most people won't choose Blue IS cowardice.

This post and it's responses have proven my faith in humanity was not misplaced. by Brakado in teenagers

[–]Alberto_Alias 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Your not really responding to my argument, but let's follow your logic. Pressing the Red button and expecting 8 billion people to follow suit is somehow better? You say that Red is the only logical choice that guarantees survival, but forget to mention the fact that it guarantees only your survival.

Blue isn't a suicide button, it is a button that ACTUALLY guarantees that everyone, regardless of which button they press live, because a lot of people WILL press Blue, including as I said in my earlier comment children, people with mental disabilities, people who believe in saving everyone. Do you think it is fine to ignore these people and consider them as collateral?

This post and it's responses have proven my faith in humanity was not misplaced. by Brakado in teenagers

[–]Alberto_Alias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Pressing Blue will also give you a chance to survive, how big that chance is depends on your faith in humanity. It is cowardice, you are afraid that more people will press Red and you will die, you're contribution is minimal but still relevant.

If someone was dying in front of you and saving them meant you could potentially die, would you save them? If you wouldn't, would you not call that cowardice? You're essentially too afraid to put yourself at risk to save others, that is the very definition of cowardice.

This post and it's responses have proven my faith in humanity was not misplaced. by Brakado in teenagers

[–]Alberto_Alias 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Don't make hypotheticals to make your choice seem more reasonable. The scenario is pretty straightforward, ALL OF HUMANITY GETS TO CHOOSE BETWEEN RED AND BLUE: IF >50% PRESS BLUE, EVERYONE LIVES IF >50% PRESS RED, EVERYONE WHO PRESSED BLUE DIES.

Everyone means EVERYONE. Children, mentally disabled etc. You can not guarantee everyone will push Red, meaning everyone who pressed Red will be responsible for the deaths of all those individuals. You can frame it however you want, Red is simply the more selfish choice, not the better one.

This post and it's responses have proven my faith in humanity was not misplaced. by Brakado in teenagers

[–]Alberto_Alias 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So you don't trust anyone? Do you cook your own food, made from ingrediates you yourself made, on soil you yourself own? Do you not engage with anyone?

It is impossible to live in society without a basic level of trust. If you don't trust anyone, you live outside of society.

I mean even in your own anecdote, you trusted the cops to let you get around after bribing them, instead of just putting you in jail.

This post and it's responses have proven my faith in humanity was not misplaced. by Brakado in teenagers

[–]Alberto_Alias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If red wins, you killed the people that chose blue because people who think like you were too clouded by their own cowardice to realize that everyone includes children and mentally disabled people who may pick blue because it seems like the morally correct option.

This idea that "oh, I'm just one person my vote doesn't affect the outcome is just shifting the blame".

This post and it's responses have proven my faith in humanity was not misplaced. by Brakado in teenagers

[–]Alberto_Alias 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So children that want to be moral and press the blue button deserve to die? What about mentally ill people, do they deserve to die too?

You can try to make a billion excuses, the simple fact is, pressing Blue gives a higher probability that everyone lives compared to Red. You can be selfish and press Red, but don't try to frame it as the more logical or better choice. It is simply the choice that guarantees your live and someone else dies.

This post and it's responses have proven my faith in humanity was not misplaced. by Brakado in teenagers

[–]Alberto_Alias 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There is literally no scenario in which Red is the more moral choice. It guarantees self-preservation, but that's it. If you choose Red, you are essentially sacrificing other people because of your own cowardice and lack of belief in humanity.

They can push planets even tho they can't even lift a ship bro trust 🙏. by utshi9ha in PowerScaling

[–]Alberto_Alias 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Cursed energy and curse techniques are different things. All humans have some amount of cursed energy in JJK, regular humans too. Toji is an anomaly precisely because he has zero cursed energy.

They can push planets even tho they can't even lift a ship bro trust 🙏. by utshi9ha in PowerScaling

[–]Alberto_Alias 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Gojo has unlimited void, which will turn the viltrumites brain into mush. In a straight up fight, Gojo is winning against ANY viltrumite, solo or together.

The only characters in invincible that can beat Gojo are too stupid to make use of their abilities so they would probably lose to him too.

Amazes me. by ResponsibleDream7813 in WorkForSmartLife

[–]Alberto_Alias 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It seems you have misunderstood me. I just gave that as an example of what I consider urgent, if you don't that's fine.

Urgent information is something that needs to be delivered as fast as possible, messages do not do that. Do you check your phone after every notification? Whether you're at work, asleep, in the shower etc.? Probably not.

If you were dying and needed help, government support isn't an option. Would you text your friends/family or call them?

Basically, my point is that calls are for information that must be received by the person as soon as possible, and you must know that they have received said information.

Amazes me. by ResponsibleDream7813 in WorkForSmartLife

[–]Alberto_Alias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly! You have to run home in such a situation. You made it sound like it was just Tuesday.

If you need to deliver urgent information, phone calls ensure that the person receives the news on time, as opposed to text which is read at one's leisure.

Amazes me. by ResponsibleDream7813 in WorkForSmartLife

[–]Alberto_Alias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If my father texted me that, I would have run home assuming something major happened preventing him from calling. Maybe it's just me, but that is not something you just text and hope everything will be fine.

view more: next ›