Idk which moral system you operate under, but I'm concerned with minimising human suffering. That implies hitting kill because chances of a mass murderer are too high not to. You also don't follow traffic laws to a t, but exercise caution because you don't really care whose fault it ends up being, you want to avoid bad outcomes (in this case the extinction of humankind).
ApfelstrudelWAKASAGI
joined 1 year ago
Why do you care whose fault it is? You'd want to minimise human deaths, not win a blame game.
It does create the funny paradox where, up to a certain point, a rational utilitarian would choose to kill and a rational mass murderer trying to maximise deaths would choose to double it.
You would need a crazy low probability of a lunatic or a mass murderer being down the line to justify not to kill one person
Edit: Sum(2^n (1-p)^(n-1) p) ~ Sum(2^n p) for p small. So you'd need a p= (2×2^32 -2) ~ 1/(8 billion) chance of catching a psycho for expected values to be equal. I.e. there is only a single person tops who would decide to kill all on earth.
Calorie apps are a ploy by ZOG to get me to stop drinking their sunflower oil (I won't).