Two buttons, one choice

I’ve been thinking about that viral red/blue button dilemma lately. The setup, from Tim Urban’s tweet back in April: everyone privately picks red or blue; if 50% or more pick blue, everyone lives; otherwise only the red pressers live.

Here’s the thing: you can delete either button and nothing changes. Three versions of the same game:

1. Two buttons: pick red or blue. 50%+ blue → everyone lives; otherwise only red-pressers live.
2. Blue button only: press it or don’t. 50%+ press → everyone lives; otherwise only non-pressers live.
3. Red button only: press it or don’t. 50%+ press → only pressers live; otherwise everyone lives.

Same payoffs, same equilibrium, three times. So the second button is doing zero strategic work. It’s doing psychological work. “Press the red button” is an action; “don’t press the blue button” is an omission. Strategically identical, but we read them completely differently.

I ran the experiment on myself. Version 1: red. Version 2: don’t press. Version 3: don’t press. Strategically that’s defect, defect, cooperate. Framing beat game theory inside the same head, ten minutes apart.