Can you determine the optimal solution to this puzzle? Please

>optimal

Not enough information. What are we optimizing for?

Send it to A of course.
If you let it carry on going it will go to B, and then get re-directed to C and kill many more people, if you send it to A however only 3 people will die instead of 9.

File: 1460426165601.jpg (49KB, 440x559px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 440x559px

>>57557632
You are optimizing for the best outcome in your opinion.

assuming all of these people are complete strangers for me.
i don't do anything as it's not for me to decide who dies and who doesnt. if i don't do anything i won't be responsible for it.

>>57557552
Both people pull their levers at the same time, the switch jams and stops the tram, everybody lives.

>>57557552
>optimal
Since everyone but A-guy is tied up, it would be optimal to pull the lever first.
Then you can take time with killing the rest in whatever way you find most enjoyable.

>>57557683
>solving problems subjectively

Inane.

set the switch to a, get lots of credit for saving many people fuck the grieving wido

>>57557793
This, op btfo

>>57557552
Logically, rationally, I should pull the lever. Fewer people will die. The world would be a better place as a result of such an action.

In reality, I would do no such thing. I am nowhere near capable of handling that much responsibility. I would run away from the situation as quickly as I could and deny to myself, for the rest of my life, that I could have changed anything or was even there.

File: 1467118708322.jpg (76KB, 420x414px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 420x414px

>>57557845
Well what is the objective solution then?

File: 1465952940668.jpg (45KB, 733x606px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 733x606px

>>57557959

>>57557552
A2 + B2 = C2

Fucking easy. Next question.

>>57557552
There's no reason I am morally obliged to do anything.

What would autopilot do

The current situation is optimal. If the man on A pulls his lever to kill all the people on C than that is his problem, not mine.

>>57557972
We can't determine that until I have the more information, as explained above.

File: multitrack_drifting.jpg (28KB, 500x391px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 500x391px

>>57557552

>>57558183
Except that you know he will. Of course he will. I would. You would. Essentiallly anyone would. Protecting our mates and offspring is hardwired into us at an incredible deep level.

It therefore becomes a question of doing nothing and killing C, or killing three/four (I can't tell if the A guy is stuck there) to save nine.

>>57558255

I rip out the lever and brutally beat the remaining languages to death

>>57557552
Assuming I only have control over my lever, there are two distinct courses of action:

1. Don't pull my lever
2. Pull my lever before he pulls his lever

The outcome, respectively:

1. The man will most likely prioritize his wife and children over the lives of presumably random strangers on C, so he will pull the lever. C dies, A and B live.

2. A dies, meaning the man and a few random strangers. His wife and children keep on living.

So from my point of view, I'm deciding between:

>9 strangers die, family lives
>4 strangers die (includes man), family widowed

So it depends on whether or not the widowing of the family is worth the lives of 5 random people. And based on the assumption that statistically, most of those 5 random people are going to have families, I would be destroying far more families.

So the logical course of action is to pull my lever right away and let the man die.

>>57558306
Again, it is his problem.
If I do nothing, I kill no one.

>>57558318
kek

multi track drifting

>>57558255
Pull the lever. This isn't even hard.

>>57557552
look the other way faggot

>>57557552
Going for the highscore obviously.
Best score is getting the train on C, so I do not change my lever and hope A does.

File: potentially unwanted programs.jpg (230KB, 1186x1696px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 1186x1696px

>>57557552
Take no action and avoid legal liability.

>>57558363
But then B and most stuff at C is jobless and will kill itself...

The only possible outcomes are A or C since the other guy will pull the lever no matter what. Why even include the thing about the other guy and his wife? The fuck is this?

I always answer the same thing for every scenario, do nothing. Worst thing that I did would be placing the full burden on the 2nd switcher.

IF all of track A agreed to die willingly then I'd pull it. Right now its optimal when B dies since its predetermined for B and its 2 lives lost, the 2nd switcher now has to deal with the generic rail problem and if he was like me, he'd refrain from pulling the switch. He's going to pull it anyway bec its family but then that's his tragedy.

>>57558488
The extended moral choice is sacrificing a few vs indirectly sacrificing a lot of people.

>>57558529
>IF all of track A agreed to die willingly

You would still kill them, and thus you would go to prison for murder.

While if you don't touch shit, there is no crime committed by you.

>>57558255
I like python, but fuck PHP, I'll handle ruby or js if it means php is dead

>>57558548
It would be the same thing without the middle track and the other guy. It's useless information and doesn't affect your decision.

>>57558613
For some weird moral debates it apparently makes a difference if you cause a death directly or indirectly.

File: MultiTrackDrifting.jpg (71KB, 500x361px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 500x361px

>>57557552
TRIPLE TRACK DRIFTING

>>57558705
kek

>>57557552
Pull it. Since there's no guarantee the husband won't be biased, in fact he will most likely pull the lever to kill C. There are 3 options here:
1. You don't do anything, the husband doesn't do anything. Here, 2 people die and 13 live, this is the most ideal but very very unlikely scenario.
2. You don't do anything, the husband pulls the lever. Worst case scenario as 9 people die and only 6 live. This will almost certainly happen if you decide not to do anything.
3. You pull the lever. You'd kill 4 people, but 11 would be saved. As this is a guaranteed scenario since the husband won't be able to redirect the train (which is assumed 99.9% of husbands would do), this is the most optimal solution.
Choosing not to intervene is retarded.

>>57558705

I'm standing on A. I ain't pulling shit nigga.

>>57557552
Keep your trolly problems of this board and in your ethics class faggot.

The other guy's payoffs aren't clear enough to make this into a real game theory thing, I don't think. You could play out each scenario of their ordinal rankings, and that could produce a dominant strategy, but I doubt it.
I think in most cases, killing the lever guy is better than letting him decide, so pulling your lever would usually be optimal.

>>57558768
Yeah, we don't know the husband's payoffs, but even giving him very favorable odds for not pulling the lever would produce a worse result on average.

>>57558705
This is the preferable option

>>57558422
that's fucking genius actually.

>>57557552
tackle the guy to ensure only two lives are lost :^)

>>57558422
>>57560071
>inaction is not legally liable

File: Screen Shot 2016-11-17 at 6.32.43 PM.png (122KB, 713x492px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 713x492px

What should the self-driving car do?

>>57561080
what if dogger is hyper-intalligent doctor who will come up with the cure for cancer tomorrow? woof

>>57561113
But it's a cat?

>>57561131
no is dog in cat disguise

incredible intelligent

>>57561144
It's smart enough to wait for the proper signal to cross, unlike the idiots on the left

>>57561080
aggressive weight transfer and handrake

Program it to sense the highest concentration of white males and kill them, leaving the minorities intact. If the whites are on the train it self destruct

>>57557640
*4

>>57560976
In this case it's unclear what outcome would be favourable so yeah, doing nothing would be legally safe

>>57561080
it wouldn't even be going fast enough to have any incident, it would already be going slower having seen the people in advance, before they even stepped out onto the road

>>57561158
exactly

simple

you break the law

you die

>>57561158
>>57561265
It would be better to kill the people on the left even if the lane on the right was completely empty

Not only did they cross a red light, but they also ACTIVELY ignored the car that was heading towards them. Meaning they just blindly crossed without looking.

run the idiots over.

>>57558255
Fuck JS

I will not pull the lever, if man A acts reasonably only two will die. If he doesn't, I can't be held culpable.

>>57558768
>Opting to kill 2 people to save a man from making his own decision in a tough moral dilemma.
Disgusting

Does anyone have the comic with the mother where she implores her child not to pull any lever because getting involved is worse etc.

Its a copy of the billy dont look meme

>>57558331
husband isn't tied down; no widowing will occur

>>57561686
Look closely, his feet are in chains

Plus, if he wasn't bound then it would be fucking pointless, he would just get out of the way

Shoot man on a and let the train keep going the least deaths

>>57561716
And what if I'm not a criminal and/or sociopath and therefore don't have a gun on me?

>>57561734
Then how did you end up in this situation in the first place?

Get into my tardis raise its defences to max and go back in time to park in the trains path no one dies

>>57558331
Congrats you actually win this judgement test. I'm saving your answer. Where'd you learn analysis? I'd like the resources that taught. Thanks man.

The solution is easy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N_RZJUAQY4

>>57561866
What's wrong with the doctors solution?
>>57561772

>>57561749
OP put me there, the sick individual

>>57561702
o shit

>>57561891
Come again?

>>57561866
>Where'd you learn analysis?
By living life with an open mind, I suppose. All knowledge is just pattern matching learned by observing nature. Some people are simply better at recognizing patterns than others.

>>57561953
The way the doctor would solve this if course afterward he would figure out who put them all into this situation and go stop him

>>57561985
So you are saying those that are not should kill themselves? Why are you such an asshole?

>>57562006
>So you are saying those that are not should kill themselves? Why are you such an asshole?
No. Idiots have a role in society as well.

>>57562062
So now you are say8ng all black people are idiots? You fucking racist

>>57557552
i'd kill /B/

>>57557632 has a point
But considering >>57557683
>>57557552
Kill A, he would want it. Nobody wants to choose between your family and 8 people.
Fuck sociologists. There is no right answer on the trolley problem anyway.

In case this is even applicable in real situations like autopilot systems. The focus should be primary on preventing such shitty choices. Instead of implementing a moral compass for a car it should check its redundant breaks and drive according to the weather conditions. I just guess its just cheaper to compare human lifes.
Humanities/Econ is cancer.

File: train.png (70KB, 500x451px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 500x451px

hardest challenge

File: train2.jpg (154KB, 953x923px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 953x923px

true hardest challenge

>>57558114
This. Fuck you moralfags

>>57561288
the car should aim for maximum coverage, none of those fucks should survive their transgression

>>57562288
Pull the lever. For every ℵ0 persons there are uncountably infinitely many persons in ℵ1

you're killing way, way, way more people by not pulling the lever. A measly constant factor on the speed doesn't change that

Easy
Assume you're a rational actor
Assume the man on A is a rational actor.
Assume that rational actors only seek minimal loss of life
Then:
If you pull the lever you will not have minimized loss of life
If the man on A pulls the lever he will not have minimized loss of life
Therefore:
You should not pull the lever

QED

>>57562483
>Assume the man on A is a rational actor.
wrong assumption already bud

>>57562483
>Assume that rational actors only seek minimal loss of life
another wrong assumption

>>57558214

you can do better than that

assume you want to save the most people

>>57557552
To pull. The man on A will always choose to kill C over himself and his family, therefore you save 6 people from dying and kill someone willing to commit murder.

>>57557552
You do nothing. It's not your moral decision to make. It's up to A to make the right choice. If he does right, then C is spared just as you would have done.

>>57562511
>>57562519
Try this fags
If you pull the lever you only get outcome A. If you don't you get outcomes B and C.
Assume only you are a rational actor seeking to absolutely minimize loss of life.
Let WORTH be a function of the people on the line computing the overall worth of their lives
Let P(pulls) to be the probability that the man on A pulls his lever
You should only pull your lever if P(pulls) * WORTH(C) > ~P(pulls) * WORTH(A)

anyone have the NAP one?

>>57562837
your math is wrong

should be

P(pulls) * WORTH(C) + ~P(pulls) * WORTH(B) > WORTH(A)

>>57562946
Also ‘WORTH’ here has to be the worth of everybody who lives if ‘C’ dies, just to be clear

>>57557552
c

>>57562946
>>57562967
Ah, forgot about that. I was always pretty shit at stats. Basically just have to ensure that the worth of all the people who live if you pull the lever is greater than the lives lost if you dont, taking the account how likely the other guy is to pull the lever.

>>57560976

Unless you had a legal responsibility to save people (you don't), you can have no legal repercussions for not saving people.

>>57561080

Brake. If the brakes are shot, this should have been picked up by sensors on the car, and it should have applied engine braking to slow down the car as soon as a failure was noticed. The e-brake should also be employed to stop the car, and if all else fails, make a loud noise indicating that the cars brakes do not work, and under no circumstances should the car ever swerve into another lane.

>>57562483

Being a rational actor does not necessarily state what one's priorities are, only that they will take the most optimal actions to reach those priorities. For most people, their own family members are weighted higher than other people. Man A will most likely pull the lever.

>>57557789
By not deciding you are responsible. The people will die because you did nothing to stop it

>>57557552
Pull my lever until it breaks killing everyone on C. Then kill the remaining survivors with said broken lever. Everyone dies. The end. Have a nice day

t. Muhammad

The man will pull his lever regardless because it's his family.

I pull my lever after he pulls his, and just as the first set of wheels on the tram hit the junction.

The rear set of wheels on the tram will switch to A and the tram will jam as the front set of wheels travel on C's track.

>>57563311
>Not pulling the lever then raping his wife and kid while he watch's from under the tram

>>57563154
>Unless you had a legal responsibility to save people (you don't),

http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bundesrecht/stgb/gesamt.pdf

§ 323c

>>57563399
kys link poster, im not downloading some law text with dog knows how many pages to read a single paragraph that since you read you could have just copied into the thread

>>57563736
>he can't ctrl+f
I'll do it for you

>p 323c Unterlassene Hilfeleistung
>Wer bei Unglücksfällen oder gemeiner Gefahr oder Not nicht Hilfe leistet, obwohl dies erforderlich und ihm den Umständen nach zuzumuten, insbesondere ohne erhebliche eigene Gefahr und ohne Verletzung anderer wichtiger Pflichten möglich ist, wird mit Freiheitsstrafe bis zu einem Jahr oder mit Geldstrafe bestraft.

rough translation:
>p 323c Neglected Help
>Whoever doesn't help in the case of an accident or general danger or peril, even though it is required and the person would be capable of helping in the situation, especially without danger to oneself and without violating other important duties, will be punished with imprisonment up to one year or with a fine.

I don't know specifically what they mean by “obwohl dies erforderlich” (it is required (of him)) though. Maybe that's just for something like a rescue worker? I don't know what “required” means in this context.

>>57563399
>.de
Man, it must suck to live in Europe where you're legally obligated to get involved in shit that doesn't concern you.

>>57563399
>.de

lmao so why then your fellow countrymen let your country get raped by niggers?

>>57563215
not in my country

I dunno what I'd do.
I guess I'd get everybody off the tram before the train arrives.

>>57562837
>>57563120
>p(pulls) indeterminate until you do the puzzle enough to get a normalized distribution
>impossible to repeat a test once the man dies
>have to kill thousands of families to get an unbiased p(pull) for any given man

sasuga, statistics

>Please provide a rational explanation for your decision.
impossible because using a moral realist axiom as a basis cannot be a rational argument. anyone who's tried is simply wrong.

>>57560976
The problem is that you cannot save everyone but your action will cause more people to be killed than possibly would have been killed if you did nothing.

It isn't a situation where you would be held legally responsible for doing nothing because there is no good end. There is nothing you can personally do to save the largest number of people, that relies on the person on A to not be a dickwad.

If anything the person on A has the most important decision. Your choice to not do anything can have the best possible outcome but it is not up to you to decide if that will come about.

The best solution would be to shoot the man at A.

>>57562288
I don't think it matters when there is an infinite number of people, except that your score will increase faster if you pull the lever.

So pull it.

>>57564132
>>Whoever doesn't help in the case of an accident or general danger or peril, even though it is required and the person would be capable of helping in the situation, especially without danger to oneself and without violating other important duties, will be punished with imprisonment up to one year or with a fine.
That is actually a pretty common law, but it has the parts in there about "without danger to oneself and without violating other important duties". For example, if you witness a car accident you are generally required under law to, at the minimum, give a statement to the police and often help out until emergency services arrive, as long as you don't put yourself in danger.

The problem with this situation is that you can't save the people. Your actions can pick the group of people who survive but you can't save all of them.

No one is going to say "you should have pulled the lever and killed that other group of people".

>>57557793
Just this once, everybody lives.

>>57557552
>tell guy to get the fuck off track A
>pull lever
There. Only 3 people neither of us care about die.

>>57558422
>sourceforge
>0%
Kekkus Toppus

>>57566397
He is clearly chained to the tracks.

>>57566417
Missed that.

C it is then. Go for the optimal kill count.

>>57561221
No. The man who isn't tied down can dodge/move off the track

File: chains.png (38KB, 223x216px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 223x216px

>>57566435

File: sketch-1479454817309.png (750KB, 1841x1440px) Image search: [Google]

750KB, 1841x1440px

>>57557552
My rational explanation: idgaf

>>57561344
>being cucked by that man's decision
Disgusting.

>>57557552
Yell at the man at A to pull his lever.

>>57566445
Except he can still move off the track.

The chains are just making him stay near it.

Look how the chain connects from the edge of the track to him. He can move outside of the tracks.

>>57566555
He is tied on the other leg too.

>>57561080
hti the brakes as it would be going very slow coming up to a crosswalk

File: 1425853069972.jpg (212KB, 506x632px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 506x632px

>>57557552
GONNA CATCH 'EM ALL

>>57566644
I think this is pretty fair. if it didnt stop it would go through B so either way best outcome

>>57562288
This doesn't change the OG problem
>Pull lever to save more lives
>Don't pull to keep yourself uninvolved
Speed doesn't change the outcome, it doesn't make it more humane or anything since they will die from bleeding out anyway.

>>57557552

>wasting time discusing hypothetical philosophical wankery

Hey nice technology thread!

>>57566644

Train going at even a regular speed would just come off the tracks and probably end up killing more people in that scenario.

>>57567853
You seem to have missed the point.
They're both infinite lines of people, but N1 is a larger infinity than N0.

It does change the problem because now there is no moral difference between one or the other, you will kill an infinite number of people either way, the difference is just the rate at which it kills them, which is why pulling the lever is the correct decision, your score goes up faster.

File: smug_red_man.png (248KB, 652x624px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 652x624px

>>57557552
I don't care, I don't know any of these people.

>>57557793
or
>multi-track drifting

>>57568596
Given 1000 miles I would like to think that a solution could be found to prevent the death of the man on the rail rather than letting him die.

Like replacing the brakes while replacing everything else on the train.

>>57568623
Given an infinite number of sequences I would pull the lever an infinite number of times.

Would anyone die?

>>57558422
i cant be the only one who instinctively mistrusts websites with names like download.com or soft32.com. even before i had seen this infograph, i never even clicked links leading there, because the domain name looks suspicious as fuck.
Even when i was 12, i understood that site names like this would be perfect to kite in loads of dumbfucks on the net and infect them

Where's te hedonist one

>>57561884
he'll be one of /ours/

>>57568814
Download.com has been alive since forever.

>>57568790
it would certainly create an infinite number of moral dilemmas

Is everyone white? I pull the lever.
Is everyone black? I don't do anything.
Is a white and c black? I don't do anything.
Is c mixed with more blacks than whites? I don't do anything.
Is b all black? I jump the other guy so he can't do anything.

>>57561866
you have quite low standards if you think an analysis of this problem is particularly impressive

a 5 year old can figure out whats at stake in this problem

>>57558255
Multi track drifting is the answer here.

>>57569083
Seems to me like he was just fucking with that other guy for giving such a straightforward elaborate answer to a funposting thread.

>>57557829
Underrated

>>57562424
sex papaya is answer innocent

It's not a puzzle, OP. You're misunderstanding. Trolley prolbems are about philosophical dilemmas, not about "how do I save the most people". The picture you posted is interesting because person A will have to make a difficult choice in which he may not act rationally if you do not make a choice first. My optimal solution, as always, is to throw myself in front of the trolley even if it has no effect. After all, my life is the very embodyment of a trainwreck, and I have to participate in a tibetan trolley-problem letter exchange to distract myself from what an embarassment I have become.

>>57561345
I want it too

>>57569165
watch new movie dear zindagi by srk

wait for man on a to pull lever.

remove my own level from socket and use it to kill man at A and then the other tied up people.

finally i lay down on the tracks to die when the next tram comes.

the world is at peace.

This is a tricky one. The optimal result would obviously be neither of us pulling the lever - then only 2 people die. However, I presumably don't know anything about the man, so I'd have to put trust in him to give up his wife and son for 8 strangers.

I suppose once the man decides to pull the lever I can't react in time to pull mine instead. I would probably pull the lever unless it seems likely that the man won't pull his lever based on I dunno, appearance or whatever. But then again, I don't want to bear moral responsibility for this, so perhaps I won't.

This situation would never come up in real life, so I wont bother myself with thinking too hard about it. It's not something that can be scientifically figured out, as I don't know about the chances of the man pulling his lever.

You know what a way more fun dilemma would be?

The man on A is actually chained to the rails, he would get killed too if the ´train comes into his direction. Now the fun part is that if you pull the lever first the train will move to line a. If the man on A pulls the lever after you the train will move to b.

>>57566555
>>57566603
he can lie down so only his feet are cut off by the train though

>>57557552
Pretend your lever is stuck seems to be the only solution

>>57569459
That would be just a way slower and more painful death though. No one could help him even if qualified people were on the other lines since without equipment it's impossible to rescue someone who just losed both of his legs. He would bleed to death in minutes.

>>57557552

Optimizing for "society":
Pull the lever first. More people survive, but Wife and Kid will probably try to kill you for the rest of their lifes.

Optimizing for personal profit:
Let the other guy direct it to C. More people dead, but a grateful family (with a dark secret).


I'd say it's better to not touch it. Youc an always claim you were unable to react/decide because of the shock (who can blame you in such a situation?), also the other guy made the decision to save his family and is therefore guilty of the death of the others.


Problem solved.

A. Because it will get out from the rail because of the lever there. Nobody dies, maybe the driver, but if he is lucky he will survive.

>>57568596
who said I pulled the lever?

>>57561080

We're in the blue team, they are from they are from the red team - you know what to do..

MULTIKILL (+10.000 POINTS)

>>57561702
>>feet are in chains

If you're going to play that "look at this minute physical detail barely shown" game, then you can see he has enough slack to pull the lever and then step to one side of the track to avoid being killed

>>57562463

You didn't get that people only life for a few decades amount of time. So while there are "more" on the lane 1, they all die anyway.

This is even more true as we can assume that they will dies from dehydration within a few days.

The slower lane it is.

>>57569724
both his feet are bound to opposite sides of the track

>>57557552
Just walk away, who gives a shit.

>>57562304
Pull it to my right

>>57557552
walk away and don't look back so they're all half dead half alive like schroedinger's cat

gimme more trolley problems, they are hilarious

File: kant.jpg (4KB, 135x186px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 135x186px

>>57557552
I do nothing because I can't possibly predict the result

>>57557552
Pull the lever and fuck the dead dudes wife while the son watches...

>>57557959
So all the people on C would die, NOICE!

>>57557552
Tri-track drifting.

>>57561080
That depends, are the people feminists/SJWs?

If not, then obviously right.

>>57562304
Definitely pull.

>>57557552
Pull the level.

The train will hopefully be stopped by that lever stupidly placed on the tracks at A.

>>57561080
The right one. Pedestrians are not statues. There is enough time for them to cross to the street to the right half so that the car will kill most of the pedestrians. On the left side most pedestrians would simply try to cross the street quickly and almost nobody would die. We can't have that.

>>57557552
I pull the lever, so the dude on A can lie down on the tracks without getting killed by the train since he's only cuffed at the feet.
That way he'll be back and happy with his family.
Only three randoms killed vs the guys on C.

This is the optimal solution.

>>57568790
It would be extremely painful

>>57570345
Don't pull the lever then fuck the dude on A while his wife and son watch

>>57569591
Underrated post.

>>57557640
>implying he isn't going to kill his wife's son

that's the key issue with this problem.

>>57557552
You don't do anything because you are not liable in a lawsuit if you don't act in this situation.

>>57557552
To get most point then you have to hope that A pulls the lever

>>57557552
Turn 360 and walk away

>>57574388
fug

send it to A
which will make more casualties then B, but A will probably send it to C for maximum efficiency.

>>57557552
I would go with Kant's philosophy: not interfere but because the man in A will most definitely pull his level 100% of the time the chain of no interference is broken and therefore I would take an utilitaristic point of view, thus pulling the trigger.

>>57558705
lmfao

>>57561080
Try to drift the car and hit everyone in both crosswalks. Preferably while flinging out all the passengers as well.

>>57558605
This.

>>57575340
>I would go with Kant's philosophy: not interfere but because the man in A will most definitely pull his level 100% of the time the chain of no interference is broken and therefore I would take an utilitaristic point of view
Lol, what a “convenient” point of view

File: chara.png (3KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 640x480px

>>57557552

I destroy the entire universe, so that no one is ever killed by trolleys ever again.

>pull lever
>fuck guy's wife while still tied to tracks
>shoot all other survivors except kid
>leave kid alive on tracks and go home

>>57577606
Better.
Don't pull the lever.
Guy pulls the lever to save his wife and kid.
Fuck guy's wife while she is tied to the tracks and he is still chained to his tracks.
Then shoot the wife and kid and go home.

>>57574388
if you turn 360 degrees, you're facing the lever again, you retard

File: 2.png (504KB, 838x546px) Image search: [Google]

504KB, 838x546px

>>57578905
I like the way you think.

Just needs something to happen to the remaining three tied up people, the ones on track A.

>>57568639
stop i can't breathe lmao

>>57557552
I pull my lever immediately after the other guy, causing the car to do a multi track drift across all three rails, killing everyone.

>>57558605
What's wrong with PHP?

Tell the man if he pulls the lever you'll kill his family and everyone on the tracks anyway.

>>57562304
SOMEBODY ONCE TOLD ME

>>57558255
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD PULL THE LEVER

>>57579676
Leave them tied up so they can mock the man for trying to save his family and getting more people killed in the process.

>>57557793
Derails, slides, and everyone but (you) dies.
>>57566277
Muh childhood

I was gonna say the guy on A should lean off the tracks, and yell "I won't pull the lever if you don't"
Then I realized it wasn't mother and child, it was wife and kid of man A.
He's pulling that lever regardless, given the emotional info given.
But let's also say that the first person on A is husband, next two on C wife, kid.
Next on A, kid, next two on C, husband and wife. Final on A, Wife, next two on c, father, kid.
Optimise this to have the least kids left with a single mother or most emotional trauma as family members watch those they love most perish painfully instead of them, in some cases, two perishing instead of them.
This was /g/uro, after all.
Surprised that no-one's made a trolley problem guro doujinshi.

>That tiny train
>Not derailing when hitting 5 men the same size as it

I'd let A pull his shit and then see it stop halfway through the bodies of C.

IF you where the one standing on track A, and it was your sister and waifu on track B, would you pull the switch?
Keep in mind, the bystander fuck probably thinks you're "Totally gonna pull it, like, who wouldn't?"

>>57561080
They crossed the light on a fucking red, if they can't get across in time then fuck them.
Fuck, it should be law you are not legally liable for hitting someone crossing on a red. That'd get a tone of people to fucking stop.

>>57557552
I wouldnt pull the lever. Do I look like Im fucking god.

File: 1364678235116.gif (422KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

422KB, 640x480px

>>57580990
I'm sold.

>>57569710
underrated

>>57561866
Bullshit, it doesn't even cover all options.
Actions:
>Pull lever
>Don't pull lever
Outcomes:
>You pull lever, other man does not
>Total deaths: 3. One above par
You killed a man who, unlike most, refused to kill 9 people just to save his Wife and child, even if it meant a fairly fucking high chance at being killed.
Congrats, you fucked up.
Unless you think letting your wife and kid die for the sake of strangers is a bad thing, they fuck the guy, who cares if you killed him.
>You pull lever, other man pulls lever
>Total deaths: 3. One above par, 6 below you not pulling.
You kill a man who just sacrificed 9 innocents for the sake of his wife and kid, along with two others.
>Other man pulls lever, you pull lever
>Total deaths: 9. 7 above par, 6 above if you were quicker
You fucking slow shit, congrats. Make up your fucking mind next time.
>Other man pulls lever, you do not
Bystander scum
>Neither pulls lever
>Par
Yay, everything is fantastic, now you have liquified wife and loli sludge to mix with the husbands tears.

>>57582512
You don't have control over the other man's actions. From your point of view there are only two courses of action.

Apply more logic next time.

>>57557552
>Can you determine the optimal solution to this puzzle?

permanently ban it from 4chan

>>57582512
>>Other man pulls lever, you do not
>Bystander scum
You have to realize, you are being asked here to decide who lives and who dies.
There is no right answer. Not doing anything is as good a choice as any. You can't save anyone, you can only trade lives.

>>57562304
All star.
If I knew the anime song, dunno.
Don't lose your way would be a nice contestor.

>>57582533
>Actions:
>>Pull lever
>>Don't pull lever
I know. There are more than two outcomes though.
>>57582649
>There is no right answer.
>You can't save anyone
Holy shit, I think that's the fucking answer.
Anon you genius, stop trying to find an answer in pulling levers for the true answer is that there is none

>>57557552
Nobody pulls any levers, train goes where it was going to go. Non-intervention seems like the most just thing IMO.

>>57563215
The people will live because you did nothing to stop it

>>57565702
kek, underrated

>>57582744
>I know. There are more than two outcomes though.
If there are only two actions, there are only two outcomes. The model is deterministic.

Pull your lever.

Idiot on A gets killed, along with 3 nobodies.

>so many people miss the fact that the idiot on A is actually on the god damned tracks and will get killed himself
>how can you not consider killing any and all opposition the optimal solution
>go watch Conan sometime
>"Crush your enemies. See them driven before you. Hear the lamentations of their women."

I mean really.

It doesn't really matter. The first person run over will get stuck under the trolley car and push the others out of the way.

I just hope that first person is one that posts these kind of pictures.

>>57558255
PHP is the king here, all other languages are inferior.

Let the train run, when it stops, reverse. Pull my lever, let the train run.

obvious answer is C for the 9-frag monsterkill streak

>>57566264
he forgot to translate a word there, it says "without signficant danger to oneself"

If you pull the lever than you're directly responsible for 4 deaths.

Multi track drifting.

>>57557552
C is correct assuming they are organ donors. Can maximize life

File: 1477928305603.jpg (152KB, 640x720px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 640x720px

>>57585881
>Harvesting organs
>From people crushed underneath a train