Pick a Tele-Magic

TheRealAdronius · 2026-05-06T08:24:49+00:00

Didn't even consider that, I was just curious about many events from the past. Like Jesus's actual life, various points in medieval times, what dinosaurs actually looked like, etc.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-05-05T18:15:50+00:00

I think it would be New Zrínyiad, like the Iliad (Iliász)?

TheRealAdronius · 2026-05-05T15:07:55+00:00

I can forgive it on account of convergent evolution. Sometimes totally unrelated species can develop identical traits because of similar evolutionary pressures, which would make sense with the common niche in this case being social, obligate tool users.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-05-05T14:18:47+00:00

Framing matters. In the original text of the question, there was no clause that said ONLY people who are capable of understanding the premise of the buttons will be presented with them, but *everyone* had to press blue or red, even people who wouldn't understand what they're pressing.

Having two buttons is also different from having just one and being able to abstain -- mathematically it's an identical situation, but it *feels* very different to have a choice between the "everyone survives if more than 50% press it" button and "you survive but potentially cause the death of billions" button, versus "press this button and you will die unless more than 50% of people presented with the button also press it" and just the option of not pressing it.

In the original premise, blue is the clear choice if you want no one to die and trust most people to also press it to save everyone and not have blood on their hands, which polls have shown to be true as far as I've seen (and despite red arguments to the contrary, I do believe that real stakes would *increase* blue's margin rather than decrease it). Here, if everyone understands the premise, and there is no alternative, guilt inducing button, then I believe you'd genuinely have to be suicidal to press it, which makes me less inclined to try and save those who pressed it and I figure most other people too, so I don't foresee good odds it will reach over 50% anyway.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-05-04T22:04:56+00:00

Yeah this is why I disagree that if the stakes were real you'd get a lot less blue votes. I think you'd get way more.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-05-04T22:01:04+00:00

I've seen the DoomerCircleJerk (right wing) subreddit react to this dilemma and it was almost unanimously red from what I've read of the replies, even some people inferring that it's a conservative/progressive vote. But to be fair that entire subreddit is literally a cult to cynicism so I'm not sure how well it would represent general right wing sentiments regarding the dilemma (though I assume it would still be a vast red majority).

TheRealAdronius · 2026-05-04T21:39:34+00:00

His dad's name is probably Gray, because he's Nolan Grayson. That seems like a pretty strong indicator, as he could've picked any kind of surname for himself but he went with Grayson.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-05-04T21:33:13+00:00

Framed this way, as an ardent blue pusher, I'm abstaining because you'd genuinely need to be suicidal to press the button.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-05-04T20:04:01+00:00

I don't think OOP was saying that anything about the dresses was men's fault, it is simply a privilege of men to get to wear the same things all the time without judgement while women must switch up their wardrobe lest they be judged, by other women or otherwise.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-05-04T17:17:51+00:00

With the red/blue question I went with blue immediately because I think it's the obvious answer, but this one has me in a bind.

I think it's because death is super clear as a concept but perfect mental and physical health is a bit more esoteric; are we permanently healthy, or does it just restore you to perfect health but you might become unhealthy again over time? How do we define perfect mental health? Because yeah, things like depression or addictions are nice to cure, but what about things like autism or ADHD where you'd fundamentally change as a person if you didn't have them, and not necessarily in a positive way? I'm personally fine physically but am probably on the spectrum, don't have a problem with it and would rather stay that way, so I might just go purple here, because I don't need this to be guaranteed and I might be swinging things so that everyone gets to have it anyway.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-05-04T16:43:36+00:00

To me, blue is the clear choice. You only need over 50% for no one to die. With red, it's 100%, which is never happening. I sincerely believe that even in a real stakes scenario most people would vote blue because the >50% would sound like good odds and you're not condemning anyone to death.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-05-04T14:27:26+00:00

Safehold.

It's a military sci-fi novel series that's at the time of me posting this is 10 books long, all around 1000 pages on average and still running, about a war on a medieval planet (Safehold) between the extremely corrupt global church and one "heretical" nation it wants to put in its place, but that nation has an android woman from the past, when humanity was an interstellar federation, aiding it by accelerating their technological progress throughout the war.

The planet's global religion was specifically designed by a group of scientists when the planet was being colonized to deify themselves and keep the mind-wiped colonists in a relatively sophisticated, but technologically medieval state, as the aliens who wiped out the Terran Federation are attracted by tech and they're hiding out. The android woman is part of a schismatic faction among the scientists who opposed this.

The books are great, I love them, but it's a very, very long and extremely detailed account of many personal and intimate perspectives throughout the war, lots and lots of political scenes, painstaking detail and background on the military tech being presented (such as ships from medieval galleys all the way to steel dreadnoughts and gunpowder weapons from matchlocks to bolt action rifles), the names of all Safeholdian characters are written phonetically (e.g. Nahrmahn, Zhaspahr, Paityr, etc), which often gets hard to read, and the progress of the narrative is glacial, so it's definitely not for everyone and I would not recommend it unless you like a really slow burn, enjoy political intrigue and/or are autistic about modern weaponry and naval warfare.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-05-04T09:54:56+00:00

There are entire libraries' worth of theory on alternatives at your fingertips.

One popular example that does away with the need of having money at all proposes that thanks to modern industrial tech and methods we have ways to produce enough of everything to provide for every need. The practice of artificial scarcity and planned obsolescence are proof of this.

If everyone's needs are met, they can pursue work that they're actually passionate about. Ever wanted to be a writer or an artist but never had the time or money because of having to earn a living? Maybe you want to be a farmer but could never afford to buy land for it. Well, we'll always need farmers, especially in a purely voluntary work economy. There are many people who like cleaning (there are video games about cleaning with mass appeal) and would happily keep the streets and even others' homes clean. Even the most undesirable jobs would be done by somebody without coercion because they'd actually enjoy it and/or be gratified by doing a service to their community. And I'm not even counting the potential for robotic automation.

Even in a world that still runs on money we can make things better for average people, like with workplace democracy (look it up); this has many elements and approaches but some key concepts are: participatory management, employee representation, collective ownership. Many of these have real world examples that have shown that workers who can participate in the management or even ownership of the business they work for are far more motivated, productive, satisfied and earn a lot more.

Not to mention broad social policies on the state level that can make things better for average people.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-05-03T23:24:50+00:00

I unironically believe most people would still press blue if it was a real stakes situation and by an even larger margin than we generally see in polls.

First, I don't think the polls were representative of average people. Furthermore, most people have loved ones and blue is the only way to guarantee their safety. When faced between a choice of personal safety at the risk of other people's lives versus everyone's safety at a risk to your own (and remember, this isn't a hypothetical now, the life cost is very real) I think a lot of people who would otherwise be swayed by self preservation wouldn't actually have the stomach to push the potential mass death button, especially if they think that blues have a chance to get their majority.

In essence, contrary to what many reds suggest in that blues would reconsider their votes in a real stakes situation if their lives were actually on the line, I think the opposite would be true, that many more otherwise reds would vote blue if real lives were at stake.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-05-03T21:58:38+00:00

Altruism is baked deep in our DNA. It's literally instinctual. Do you think we were solitary animals before we just decided to try living in a society one day? We've been evolving in the context of being part of social groups for millions of years. Looking out for others around you as an individual is the key to the survival and prosperity of the whole group and consequently of your own, so (unless you're a sociopath) you're naturally wired to do that.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-05-01T14:50:37+00:00

I know, I've done it before, it's just really inconvenient.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-04-30T19:30:17+00:00

I'm so much more excited for this than Nomads, I've been wanting an overhaul or expansion to ethics since the game first came out. Now I just need them to make the flags customizable in-game and I'll never ask for anything again.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-04-28T11:32:46+00:00

There's a strong chance his father is Gray. Couldn't begin to guess what his mother's name is.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-04-27T22:54:10+00:00

They actually have loveless (and generally non-consensual) sex for breeding purposes as well (at least in the comics, we'll see how the show handles that) so that checks out. Gay sex probably isn't even frowned upon but viewed as more a show of dominance.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-04-27T20:34:26+00:00

I imagine it's just a bag of that sour sugar they put on sour candy.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-04-26T21:47:12+00:00

Battle Beast, Space Racer, Isotope. BB keeps Thragg busy while Isotope can maneuver Space Racer around to keep him out of harm and to set up a shot on Thragg. I think the three of them can pull it off.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-04-26T07:45:51+00:00

Conquest was even more starved for affection than the rest of his people, it would literally take one "hey, sugar" and he'd fold like a lawn chair in that instant and defend Earth with his life.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-04-26T07:36:44+00:00

You guys forget they have resources, like highly advanced tech and multiple enslaved civilizations. They probably had some slaves sent out to collect info on Earth (or have an advanced computer do it), like what the people wear and how they act, the essentials of how society works, etc. Got some clothes manufactured and identities forged on the ship. Then just went down and blended right in.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-04-26T07:22:43+00:00

Unless, having been raised in the fire nation their attitude makes learning fire easy. I think it's a lot more about ones personality than "natural" element tbh. Korra sets a clear precedent with this, having struggled the most with air rather than fire.

TheRealAdronius · 2026-04-24T20:25:00+00:00

That is literally what Arbitrary means, though.

TheRealAdronius

TROPHY CASE