You must log in or register to comment.
remember that cring video he did with KSI, its like they were in cave in afghanistan, and he had a gun to the guests head to force them to eat his lunchly.
The bourgeoisie already does that offer, the proletariat can’t choose it.
You pay taxes in the US, you’ve already paid for the random death of people.
paid, not been paid - that’s a difference, and also not voluntarily. Arguably, those who don’t pay taxes (i.e. took many times 10000) are causing the deaths of millions by their lobbying to become richer.
This is an old twilight zone episode. A women is given a box with one button on it and told to press it is she wants the money.
She decides the push the button, and then someone comes to collect the button device, saying that it will now be reset and taken to someone else now for the same challenge. Some random person on earth. Implying that she will be the next to die if the button gets pushed.
Frankly not a bad system. Slowly cleanses the selfish from the earth.
She got $20,000 if I’m not mistaken. In '80s money.
Also it was originally meant to kill her husband. They changed it for the show.
$200,000 - which if you consider that it was 1980s money, makes Mr. Beast’s $10,000 look very small.
By “originally meant to” I think you are referring to the short story it was based on ending that way.
A despondent Norma asks the stranger why her husband was the one who was killed. The stranger replies, “Do you really think you knew your husband?” strongly disapproved of the Twilight Zone version, especially the new ending
Frankly I find the twilight zone ending more chilling and suspenseful. The “do you think you really knew your husband” line is kinda sad trombone.
Was the lady told what would happen if she pressed the button?
Yes it was clear that someone somewhere in the world “who you don’t even know” would die. The characters have a debate:
“Maybe it’ll be just some Chinese peasant.”
“What if it’s someone’s newborn baby!”
More than anything I’m shocked at the casual dismissal of the Chinese peasant. WTF?
Anyway at the very end of the show the same guy who brought them this dilemma comes to collect the device and he very pointedly uses the same language to say “now it will go to someone new that you don’t even know.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Button,_Button_(The_Twilight_Zone)
Yes, that somewhere in the world, someone she doesnt know will die.
When Mr. Steward returns to collect the button box after the button is pressed, the lady asks what happens to the box next. She is told it will go to someone else with the same offer, with assurances that the new recipient will not know who she is. As the previous commenter said, the wording deeply implies she would be the certain “someone” targeted by the next button press.
But what would happen if she didn’t press it? Would the button be offered to someone else again? In that case, she would be targeted regardless of her choice.
The dilemma is “would you push a button for money” not “would you push a button knowing what it did for money”
“Would you push a button for money”, on its own, is barely a dilemma. If you’ve been given no good reason not to press it then you don’t have a reason not to press it. I’d be curious to see this Twilight Zone episode because, if it really is presented that way to her, then it’s not her morals that are comprimised and instead that of whoever distributed that button.
Some people are actually paid to press buttons.
She’s told that someone on earth would die and she doesn’t know them. The twist is that while it’s implied that it’s a random person, it’s revealed at the end that it’s the last person to press the button.
So, yes?
There’s this cool new thing where you can search for stuff on the Internet. You should check it out. To answer your question, yes - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Button,_Button_(The_Twilight_Zone)
Heaven forbid I try to have a conversation
There’s this cool thing called linking, too.
I’m assuming the device gets passed on regardless if the button is pressed. If that’s the case, does it have any correlation to selfishness getting punished? Me living or dying has to do with the NEXT person being selfish, not whether I was selfish or not. Unless I’m missing something
I believe the idea is that if you push the button, it goes on to someone else. If they DON’T push the button, they get skipped. It goes to someone else besides them. And so on, until SOMEONE does push the button. And at that point, the last person who pushed the button gets iced.
And so in that way, every person who pushes the button inevitably gets killed, removing selfish people from the world while morally upright people get passed over.
This isn’t detailed in the episode, it’s just my mind filling in between the lines.
Ok that makes way more sense.
It’s a life, how much could it cost. $10,000?
No.
Also, fuck Mr. Beast. A billionaire proposing yet another Trolley Problem for amusement and engagement bait.
Jokes aside, no. I don’t think I’d do it for $100 million. I seriously don’t.
The justifications y’all are providing don’t work for me. Maybe it’s because I have a son, and I can imagine he would be the one to die, then I remember everyone is the child of someone, or the friend, etc.
I will not be the knowing cause of the death of some random person just for money. You guys can have it. No, thank you.
Bro, for 100 million, if you told me the button would kill me, I would press it, after writing my will first.
That is almost world-chaning money, so I would be ethicaly obligated from my perspective to press it.
Im the same way. If someone gave me a gun and gave me a choice to shoot myself or a stranger, I would shoot myself.
Mostly because I believe what we do matters. Many dont.
$100 million brings you into a different philosophical debate. $100 million is more than enough that you could use the money to save at least a few lives
If the whole 100M was spent on saving lives, no contest.
What if you just kept back $50 for a nice meal out? Is that meal cursed?
Yeah I’m not killing for money, even if I’m not the one doing the physical part of the execution
You could save way more than 1 life with $100M. Malaria nets save on average one life for every $3k donated. Child deworming doesn’t save a life per se, but you can stop a child from being permanently disabled for ~$500.
Sacrificing a person in order to help a number of people survive for a month or a year is still a terribly bad calculation if you ask me
Ok, then you are sacrificing number of people to save one person. Think of what happens in wars: people don’t even flinch at sacrificing someone
I would in a heartbeat. I would keep 5k for myself, 10k for my parents. And donate the rest to cleaning up the environment, and curing cancer/diabetes. That would save more people.
Still pennies compared to the damage we make to the environment any single day
What is this from
The Dark Knight I believe.
You’re right!
The ultra rich:
I’d do it for $10!
We learned during Covid that at least half of the country would kill not some stranger, but their neighbors and friends, and not for ten grand, but to avoid the mild discomfort of wearing a mask and social distancing
many of them were willing to kill their own children, and even themselves, to briefly avoid that mild discomfort
Actually, the ultra-rich actively spend money to cause suffering.
I’m poor and would do it for 100.
That is happening everyday, done by thousands of people who could have stopped those deaths readily. Just they are obsessed with more wealth.
if anyone presses the button and I die I’m haunting your stupid ass forever
No.
Counter proposition: for every €10 I pay, a random fascist dies. I’m willing to spend all my money, and am willing to take gifts from others to continue paying more amounts of €10 for as long as I have any. I’ll even spend €100 to prioritize highly influential fascists first.
The monkey’s paw curls. The word fascist has become so debased that you are now $80 billion in debt. And dead.
That’s the premise of the Twilight Zone episode “Button, Button”. After she pressed it, the man making the deal said he’d go to “a random person on Earth” offering the same to them (implying that the person being killed will be the one who pushed the button earlier in the chain)
About 2 people are dying every second regardless, so if i don’t take the money, 2 people die.
Im actually saving a life by briefly capping the death rare at 1.
Sorry, but that’s not how it works. 3 people die that instant.
I’ll stick with the original scenario and gratefully receive $10,000 for saving a life.
But thank you for your new offer.
Honestly this seems like a pretty good representation of how powerful people cope with the consequences of their ambitions.
Nuh-huh
Yeah-huh
I would think you random death would just be added to the baseline.
I don’t know, I better take the money I think…
Well yes. But I think taking the money should actively kill someone, you can just get free money for a death that would happen anyway.
that was not a stipulation.
The next second 3 people dies, so you were just prolonging one’s suffering by 1 second
Prolong an inevitable death by one second for $10,000.
Is that stackable?
RIP 750,000 random strangers.
