• Maalus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    2 months ago

    100 people hands down. Infinite people means infinite lives removed, infinite experiences etc. The 100 people will never truly die either, so if minimizing death is the goal, that’s best. It also is the choice that will happen without your input and those are usually better morally than actively changing and sentencing other people to death by yourself.

    • Farid
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      I vote for fair distribution of suffering, instead of to just 100 people.

      • Maalus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Why tho? Your choice is to condemn a few, versus kill more people than have died throughout all of history of humankind. 100 is a drop in a bucket compared to eternal genocide.

        • Farid
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          It’s a communist thing. Fair distribution of wealth and suffering.

          • trolololol@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            It’s a capitalist assumption to think people with less karma goes first.

            Would you change your answer based on where you are on the tracks?

    • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Plus, it’s assumed that the trolley will never stop. It’s easier to utilize its free energy if it’s running in a circle.