Programmer Humor

19551 readers

1327 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

Keep content in english
No advertisements
Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

734

Recursion (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago by alphacyberranger to c/[email protected]

102 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Napkin math, from the last time I saw this:

I’ve been thinking about this. I estimate a few people per 1000 would do an atrocity for no reason if they were guaranteed no consequences, and the deaths if the switch is pulled are 2^(n-1) for the nth switch. The expected deaths will cross 1 somewhere in the high single-digits, then (since it’s outcome*chance), so the death minimising strategy is actually to pull yours if the chain is at least that long.

Edit: This assumes the length of the chain is variable but finite, and the trolley stops afterwards. If it's infinite obviously you pull the switch.

[–] tomi000 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Could you elaborate what you are analysing here? If I dont misinterpret the model, the option where you dont double the victims minimizes deaths every time.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Ah, but then you're giving the opportunity to the next guy to kill even more, if he wants. Most people obviously won't want to do that, but a rare few will, and the body count gets so big so fast that it only takes a few switches before that's a bad risk.

I was expecting a bigger number of switches, but I guess that's just another example of humans being bad at tracking the consequences of large quantities.

[–] themeatbridge 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

But if you assume that such a person exists, then it is inevitable that someone will pull the switch. The very best case is that such a person is immediately after you. Therefore, the only minimizing choice is to kill however many people you have.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Oh, I see. Yes, the context here was that we assume all possible chain lengths. If it's infinite the death-minimising strategy is obviously to pull it, and if your switch is the only one you obviously don't. The question was where it changes from one to the other.

I'll edit a clarification in.

[–] themeatbridge 2 points 1 year ago

Makes me wonder what happens when the number of people tied to the tracks exceeds rhe number of people currently alive. Should be around the 33rd lever.

[–] archiotterpup 2 points 1 year ago

I think you're on the right track.