• rbn@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 days ago

    I go for option 1.

    In all programming languages that I know, integers have a maximum number. E.g., in C that’d be 2,147,483,647. After that, you would run into an overflow, resulting in either…

    • a crash (train stops, no more deaths),
    • death count suddenly turns negative (all people previously killed are suddenly alive again and even new people are generated out of nowhere) - until we reach the next overflow when people disappear and start dying again
    • or - if it’s an unsigned integer - death count resets everytime we reach the maximum limit

    So compared to option 2, we have a chance of stopping the death count. And even if the train keeps running, we have essentially option 2 but the same people only die very rarely. If we assume a cycle of 1 death per second and an integer boundary of 2,147,483,647, that’s just one death every 68 years per person involved. Seems more fair to me compared to 100 people constantly dying over and over again.

    • Wojwo@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      Or is it like a Y2K death trolly and when the overflow happens the universe doesn’t catch the exception and things get weird. Like suddenly any number can be divided by 0.

  • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    Arguably these are different amounts of bad even before considering this: We generally consider existing preferable to non-existence to some extent when suffering isnt taken into account, consider that if you murder someone quickly and painlessly in their sleep without waking them, they dont really themselves suffer from it, but people will still find you to be a murderer, and would object to the idea that you might do it to them. In the top example, killing the people actually kills them, but in the lower example, it arguably doesnt, because the experiences of the people involved never actually cease, therefore, the lower path seems to me to be preferable because you supposedly get equivalent amounts of “suffering”, but different amounts of time that people spend in non-existence.

    • Johanno@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      Morally speaking people could argue that torturing immortal people is worse.

      However legally speaking to you don’t kill them and therefore the immortals are preferred.

  • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 days ago

    Ah, but eventually the trolley breaks down, and in the case of the reincarnating circle, you end up with zero deaths (but a whole lot of Therapy)

    • Kogasa@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      At the universities I went to, Calc 2 was integration, sequences and series, then Calc 3 was multivariable. They really pack all the harder parts into 2.

  • Iceblade@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    Programmer asks: how many bits for the integer?

    At 32 bits it’s “just” a Thanos snap with extra pain