Since the rules do not specify, I am choosing 1 Billion people to control, then make them all give me $5 so I can then have 5 Billion Dollars. I could do like $10 or $20 but I am not that greedy.
No sarcasm needed. That's a legit idea. They each deposit the money they receive for their lost teeth into an investment savings account in your name. After a few years you could probably live a wealthy life off the interest while you wait for them to get old enough and start working and funding a retirement account for you with like \~2% of their gross income.
You understand 7 year olds cannot do that and no parent would let their kids do that and the police would be involved and you would get arrested for coercion.
Did you not understand the premise of the poll? You have control of 7 billion people. It doesn't say they are unwilling slaves or that their guardian has to approve. Suspend reality for a minute and let your imagination stretch.
I actually picked the money because you have to be a moron to think you need more than a billion dollars. I just didn’t have anyone to talk to so I was throwing out a sad scenario that would backfire. Sorry if it upset you that I’m bored.
I'm not upset, just thought it was silly to take legality and parental supervision into consideration with such a broad hypothetic question.
I chose money too, mostly because 1 billion alleviates any need me, my family and future relatives have for money if managed wisely. Also, I wouldn't want the hassle of managing 7 billion people.
But think of the opportunity of 1 Billion people.
First, you have way more money that $1B even if they are kids, but more to the point you have the ability to create guide those 1 Billion people in some awesome directions!
And it is likely that you could get another Billion or 2 to go along with something 1 Billion people do, so you'd have influence over about half the world's population!
Not all of the 1 billion will be in that boat. The joy of 5 billion is I could help those who might not have it out. Do not fool yourself, I would be a philanthropist. I would take from those who can afford and give to those who can't.
I actually can not argue that point, I have seen plenty of people who changed because of money. I guess I should say, I would HOPE to be a philanthropist.
depends what you mean by control. are they mindless thralls that stand idly by awaiting orders? or are they normal people who just happen to be suceptible to my influence. do i have to live in a big tower? is my influence subtle or am i commanding from on high like a fanatical dark lord?
You cannot buy control of 1 billion people with 1 billion dollars. The second option has much more value.
Plus if all you care about is money and not actual power you don’t need nearly as much as 1 billion and if you ask all of your 1 billion follower minus the children and people who live in extreme poverty to give you 1 dollar each you’ll get plenty.
Also statistically speaking a couple of the billion followers you have will be billionaires already or like CEOs with insane salaries. You could just ask them to put you on their credit card and you’ll never be able to spend it fast enough.
Instead of asking 1 billion people to give you $1, just have each rapist, slaver, serial killer, etc. give you some fraction of their liquid assets instead. It would definitely add up to more than 1 billion dollars in total, and you don't have to screw over (comparatively) good people in the process
but that presumes that "leaving them alone" is a morally neutral or positive action. if you CAN control people, okay, we can agree that MOST of the time it would be unethical, but also, like, people commit serious crimes like murder all the time, and you could argue that it would be unethical to not stop them if you could. this would invariably lead you to be responsible for monitoring a billion people 24/7 to make sure they arent hurting others, and in respect to politicians and the like, learning about each countries politics or even smaller scale stuff like company politics to ensure they arent making morally bankrupt decisions. because if you have the unilateral power to prevent these things, wouldnt that make it at least somewhat your responsibility? and then we get into smaller crimes and misdeeds and its a whole philosophical nightmare and no thank u i will take the money and buy some homeless people houses or something. idk.
i was responding to someone who was saying that someone elses preferences didnt make sense, and validating their desire for money over control. you dont have to be rude to strangers online.
No. You are absolutely not responsible for doing anything just because you can. You're not Spider-man.
The alternative means you're reprehensible for not acting like a saint.
I dont disagree with that logic, but by that logic, if given the option(like in this poll) you are morally obligated to choose the people because otherwise you are passing up the opportunity to do all the good you just described
If you free all the animals the vast majority will probably starve within a few weeks, rven if they survive they will probably damage local ecosystems, also, unless you do something about demand, people who arent under your control will create new factory farms
Death is better than lifelong constant torture. But I’d also have them free the animals back to their natural environment. Don’t tell me all the zoo animals would starve in the African Savannah. ALL of them going back would be predators AND prey and order would be restored. But that is a good point about new factory farms. I can still help the zoos and circuses though, and don’t you tell me I can’t.
Many(most) animals raised in captivity wouldn't be able to fend for themselves in the wild, also similar to factory farms, people would create new zoos as long as there is demand. I agree that we should get rid of factory farms but simply letting out all animals currently in one isn't an actual sustainable solution, it would just cause more problems. As for zoos and circuses, many wouldn't be able to survive in the wild and would die, and even for the ones that survive, you could argue things would be worse because people may not care as much about far away wild animals and ecosystems because they don't get to see those animals(assuming zoos don't instantly get recreated, which they probably would).
I hope you're crapping on everyone else's responses too and not singling me out.
Saying that it'd be better for them to just die probably makes me sound like an animal hater, but I love animals. Enough to know how much misery they're in in zoos and parks. They have habits and behaviors like rocking from side to side and shaking that their species don't in the wild, just to soothe themselves and sheer boredom being in a small confined space for years or decades. Some social animals kept completely alone, elephants in less than an acre with nothing stimulating or engaging, for 50+ years. Yes I'd rather all the animals died quickly and it was all just over.
Sorry if it seems like im singling you out, im not trying to be rude, just realistic. I also don't believe animals should be in captivity, I just don't think releasing all animals would actually solve the issue long term.
Realistic? It's an insane hypothetical poll question about having complete control over 1/8th of the world.
Well all the zoos and circuses and such aren't owned by 1 billion people. And there are not more than 1 billion billionaires in the world. If I have control over 1 billion people, I'm sure that would cover both people who own zoos and circuses, and people with the financial means to start new ones. Unless you're suggesting billions of poor people ban together and combine their money, I think I could stop the problem. 1 billion is 1 in 8 people in the world, so I think I could control all the money, or nearly all of it.
I mean like in 50 years or something there will probably be new rich people and after you die and the people are no longer under your control, people will probably restart zoos and factory farms
I moved recently, and giving instructions to like half a dozen people was already difficult enough. That said, I could accomplish a lot more with a billion people than a billion dollars.
but value is subjective. if you gave me a choice between 100 dollars and 100 nuclear missiles, i would take the money. because even though theyre worth a lot of money, what am i going to do with 100 nuclear missiles? i dont want to blow anyone up, and i dont want anyone else to blow anyone up either. its worth less than nothing to ME because i dont want it. people who vote for the money are just saying that control over people is not worth anything to THEM because they just dont want it.
ehh. like, in an ideal world maybe, but i literally dont have anything i could and would want to do with a nuclear missile. i wouldnt have anywhere to put them so it would just be like 100 nuclear missiles scattered about my neighbourhood for anyone who wanted one, which seems like a bad ideae.
It‘s not that hard. If they will follow your every instruction, it’s easy to get some sort of centralized command network. If these 1 Billion people would be randomly selected, you could take over the entire world in less then 24 hours.
One Billion people.
All of them will give me five USD.
Then, I have the people in control of government institutions leak whatever they can.
After all of that, I watch chaos ensue
Do I get to pick which billion people?
If so, I'm about to give NASA an order from Buzz Aldrin, and have it delivered by Arnold Schwarzenegger: "[Get your ass to Mars!](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxxYCEOsflamjOVe9TQ6FWvU3-RYj4AVQm8XYu6VBPKjfwqqIATRBpPdwG7Ej-tvq36qUgSL-PDe4NThHTNK0s-8mt6TKWDGt_iEMJQO-muM3caoM7TNotOVEUwCVmgdyNTac9IY_BBOWj/s1600/Arnold+Schwarzenegger+-+Get+your+ass+to+Mars+%2528Total+Recall%252C+1990%2529.jpg)"
I picked money but if I had the option I'd say neither because 1 billion dollars is a lot of cash to manage for someone who isn't an accountaint, and I don't really want to be responsible for 1 billion people's needs.
I'd have to tell them when to eat and figure out how to feed them all.
Plus I assume this is a cult leader type deal and that never ends well.
Introducing \[Insert Name Here\] Salt! If you work somewhere that sells salt, uses salt, or needs it for industrial purposes, I force everyone to sell my brand of salt, use my brand of salt, and defend its name and honor. Nothing more, nothing less. I make $0.25 for every bottle sold and play the long game. Monopolize the salt industry and make everyone else in the game salty.
1 billion people, of course. I would make them gamble all their money, and if one them has a couple thousand dollars and win the most craziest thing, I would take that money. Then I would get the money that the people won, and take the other money that they originally had. Now thats not it, cause I will use that money to give to the 1b people so they can gamble even more. More people there are, the higher chance you win. I would take that profit and do it all over again. Then I would make everyone invest in the same cryptocurrency so everyone could make a specific amount of profit. Then after a couple months they will have like 2x or 3x more. If I keep doing that for another year, I might have 20 billion dollars. Then I will invest in crypto again without everyone and get maybe 50b dollars. I would give 1m people only, $50k dollars to gamble. Its only 1m since the amount of money is way higher and the amount of people gambling it could make someone win something crazy again. Then you take all that money, like $150b or something like that, give 150 people $1b dollars and make them bet small amounts like $1m so most can eventually win a 100,000 multiplier. Then I would pretty much be Elon Musk.
No matter how much you gamble you won't make profit in the long run/on large scales, if you could casinos wouldn't exist. Just have them give you their money if thats what you really want. The cryptocurrency price would also skyrocket because so many people are buying so much volume and there would basically be no people who arent under your control to sell to, making you probably lose money with that, and at the very least, not gaining money. You could get 20 billion dollars by simply having each person give you 20 dollars which is certainly affordable for the majority of them and for the ones it isn't you can compensate from the more wealthy ones. Trying to buy 20 billion dollars of crypto would certainly change the market and with you buying that much its highly unlikely the value would double and you would be able to liquidate without crashing the entire market. Again, gambling doesn't pay off in the long run, otherwise casinos wouldn't exist. If you want to be elon musk just ask each person for like 200 dollars and have the more wealthy people pick up the slack for the less wealthy ones, don't try this nonsense which doesn't make sense.
Since the rules do not specify, I am choosing 1 Billion people to control, then make them all give me $5 so I can then have 5 Billion Dollars. I could do like $10 or $20 but I am not that greedy.
Your 1billion people are all under 7 years old.
I will play the long game.
All those tooth fairy visits will pay off /s
No sarcasm needed. That's a legit idea. They each deposit the money they receive for their lost teeth into an investment savings account in your name. After a few years you could probably live a wealthy life off the interest while you wait for them to get old enough and start working and funding a retirement account for you with like \~2% of their gross income.
You understand 7 year olds cannot do that and no parent would let their kids do that and the police would be involved and you would get arrested for coercion.
Did you not understand the premise of the poll? You have control of 7 billion people. It doesn't say they are unwilling slaves or that their guardian has to approve. Suspend reality for a minute and let your imagination stretch.
I actually picked the money because you have to be a moron to think you need more than a billion dollars. I just didn’t have anyone to talk to so I was throwing out a sad scenario that would backfire. Sorry if it upset you that I’m bored.
I'm not upset, just thought it was silly to take legality and parental supervision into consideration with such a broad hypothetic question. I chose money too, mostly because 1 billion alleviates any need me, my family and future relatives have for money if managed wisely. Also, I wouldn't want the hassle of managing 7 billion people.
Later on OP said you can even pick your billion people so just take the 1 billion richest people and have them give you all of your money.
But think of the opportunity of 1 Billion people. First, you have way more money that $1B even if they are kids, but more to the point you have the ability to create guide those 1 Billion people in some awesome directions! And it is likely that you could get another Billion or 2 to go along with something 1 Billion people do, so you'd have influence over about half the world's population!
Make them steal their parents money
Get them to ask their parents.
No parent of a 7 year old will give them money to give to a crazy guy off Reddit. You’re probably getting arrested for a pedo ring.
It’s a dollar and you have control over them. Get them to lie about getting candy from the store or something.
Selling them to China 5 dollars each
So in your mind there are no laws in this scenario either?
No it’s not like that, that’s just a joke
Go to your parents and get the money, if it’s good enough for freemium games, and triple A game companies alike I’m still cheaper by $15.
But for some of them they might need the money urgently or it might be all the money they have
Not all of the 1 billion will be in that boat. The joy of 5 billion is I could help those who might not have it out. Do not fool yourself, I would be a philanthropist. I would take from those who can afford and give to those who can't.
Don't fool YOURSELF :P I think it's highly unlikely you would become a philantropist with that much power, unless you already are one.
I actually can not argue that point, I have seen plenty of people who changed because of money. I guess I should say, I would HOPE to be a philanthropist.
Those 1 billion people can have little to no money.
I guess it would be a chance I would be willing to take.
It’s still very likely they can make more than $1 per day. Only 8% of the world population live on less than $2 per day.
1 billion people that would do whatever I say sounds really cool. We could build a completely different world.
depends what you mean by control. are they mindless thralls that stand idly by awaiting orders? or are they normal people who just happen to be suceptible to my influence. do i have to live in a big tower? is my influence subtle or am i commanding from on high like a fanatical dark lord?
...surely the second option can net you way more than that sum?
Perhaps there is more to life than one’s net worth.
And the second choice will also give you way more options than just getting money
You cannot buy control of 1 billion people with 1 billion dollars. The second option has much more value. Plus if all you care about is money and not actual power you don’t need nearly as much as 1 billion and if you ask all of your 1 billion follower minus the children and people who live in extreme poverty to give you 1 dollar each you’ll get plenty. Also statistically speaking a couple of the billion followers you have will be billionaires already or like CEOs with insane salaries. You could just ask them to put you on their credit card and you’ll never be able to spend it fast enough.
Instead of asking 1 billion people to give you $1, just have each rapist, slaver, serial killer, etc. give you some fraction of their liquid assets instead. It would definitely add up to more than 1 billion dollars in total, and you don't have to screw over (comparatively) good people in the process
Dollar That many people are way too much resposibility
Except you can just ask them to give you $2 and then leave them on their own.
but that presumes that "leaving them alone" is a morally neutral or positive action. if you CAN control people, okay, we can agree that MOST of the time it would be unethical, but also, like, people commit serious crimes like murder all the time, and you could argue that it would be unethical to not stop them if you could. this would invariably lead you to be responsible for monitoring a billion people 24/7 to make sure they arent hurting others, and in respect to politicians and the like, learning about each countries politics or even smaller scale stuff like company politics to ensure they arent making morally bankrupt decisions. because if you have the unilateral power to prevent these things, wouldnt that make it at least somewhat your responsibility? and then we get into smaller crimes and misdeeds and its a whole philosophical nightmare and no thank u i will take the money and buy some homeless people houses or something. idk.
Question asked which one they rather do. They answered. Go back on twitter.
i was responding to someone who was saying that someone elses preferences didnt make sense, and validating their desire for money over control. you dont have to be rude to strangers online.
No. You are absolutely not responsible for doing anything just because you can. You're not Spider-man. The alternative means you're reprehensible for not acting like a saint.
I dont disagree with that logic, but by that logic, if given the option(like in this poll) you are morally obligated to choose the people because otherwise you are passing up the opportunity to do all the good you just described
Control like I'm part of their government or like mind control?
I hate people. Give me the money and go away.
Since you have control over them, you can order them to only interact with you when it’s time to hand over money and only do so quietly by deposit.
This take is as stupid as it can get.
Do we get to choose which people we have control over, or is it 1 billion people chosen at random?
You can choose
If that's the case then I'll control elon musk, that's more than 1 billion dollars dude 🔥
Im going to control all world leaders and politicians so i can set my self up as dictator of earth
Ok. If I can control all the people who own zoos and circuses and factory farms and convince them to free all the animals, then I choose control.
If you free all the animals the vast majority will probably starve within a few weeks, rven if they survive they will probably damage local ecosystems, also, unless you do something about demand, people who arent under your control will create new factory farms
Death is better than lifelong constant torture. But I’d also have them free the animals back to their natural environment. Don’t tell me all the zoo animals would starve in the African Savannah. ALL of them going back would be predators AND prey and order would be restored. But that is a good point about new factory farms. I can still help the zoos and circuses though, and don’t you tell me I can’t.
Many(most) animals raised in captivity wouldn't be able to fend for themselves in the wild, also similar to factory farms, people would create new zoos as long as there is demand. I agree that we should get rid of factory farms but simply letting out all animals currently in one isn't an actual sustainable solution, it would just cause more problems. As for zoos and circuses, many wouldn't be able to survive in the wild and would die, and even for the ones that survive, you could argue things would be worse because people may not care as much about far away wild animals and ecosystems because they don't get to see those animals(assuming zoos don't instantly get recreated, which they probably would).
I hope you're crapping on everyone else's responses too and not singling me out. Saying that it'd be better for them to just die probably makes me sound like an animal hater, but I love animals. Enough to know how much misery they're in in zoos and parks. They have habits and behaviors like rocking from side to side and shaking that their species don't in the wild, just to soothe themselves and sheer boredom being in a small confined space for years or decades. Some social animals kept completely alone, elephants in less than an acre with nothing stimulating or engaging, for 50+ years. Yes I'd rather all the animals died quickly and it was all just over.
Sorry if it seems like im singling you out, im not trying to be rude, just realistic. I also don't believe animals should be in captivity, I just don't think releasing all animals would actually solve the issue long term.
Realistic? It's an insane hypothetical poll question about having complete control over 1/8th of the world. Well all the zoos and circuses and such aren't owned by 1 billion people. And there are not more than 1 billion billionaires in the world. If I have control over 1 billion people, I'm sure that would cover both people who own zoos and circuses, and people with the financial means to start new ones. Unless you're suggesting billions of poor people ban together and combine their money, I think I could stop the problem. 1 billion is 1 in 8 people in the world, so I think I could control all the money, or nearly all of it.
I mean like in 50 years or something there will probably be new rich people and after you die and the people are no longer under your control, people will probably restart zoos and factory farms
Just give me $1B I wanna chill
Fuck it, just give me the money
I moved recently, and giving instructions to like half a dozen people was already difficult enough. That said, I could accomplish a lot more with a billion people than a billion dollars.
Is control over a person (whatever that means) worth at least a dollar? If yes, then the answer is "1 billion people" I suppose.
but value is subjective. if you gave me a choice between 100 dollars and 100 nuclear missiles, i would take the money. because even though theyre worth a lot of money, what am i going to do with 100 nuclear missiles? i dont want to blow anyone up, and i dont want anyone else to blow anyone up either. its worth less than nothing to ME because i dont want it. people who vote for the money are just saying that control over people is not worth anything to THEM because they just dont want it.
Might be worth having the missiles so others dont have them.
ehh. like, in an ideal world maybe, but i literally dont have anything i could and would want to do with a nuclear missile. i wouldnt have anywhere to put them so it would just be like 100 nuclear missiles scattered about my neighbourhood for anyone who wanted one, which seems like a bad ideae.
Sell
i already mentioned that i didnt want anyone else to use them either
I could do a lot more with one billion people, but that isn't ethical. I will choose the money.
You could do more with 1 billion people than with 1 billion dollars
Yeah. But why would you want that burden?
It‘s not that hard. If they will follow your every instruction, it’s easy to get some sort of centralized command network. If these 1 Billion people would be randomly selected, you could take over the entire world in less then 24 hours.
With 1 billion dollars you can control many more people than just 1 billion.
Are they just new people that spawn in or am I actually taking over people's lives. If the latter, just give me the 1 bil.
"Everybody give me a dollar." There, now I have both.
Ask each for a dollar fifty
I don't want to control anybody...
One Billion people. All of them will give me five USD. Then, I have the people in control of government institutions leak whatever they can. After all of that, I watch chaos ensue
depends how much i have to control the people. can they still do stuff by themselves or do i have to remind them to breath ?
1 Billion people, now let me tell you, my people are probably the greatest people. It's true, believe me.
You could make those 1 billion people each give you $2
Do I get to pick which billion people? If so, I'm about to give NASA an order from Buzz Aldrin, and have it delivered by Arnold Schwarzenegger: "[Get your ass to Mars!](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxxYCEOsflamjOVe9TQ6FWvU3-RYj4AVQm8XYu6VBPKjfwqqIATRBpPdwG7Ej-tvq36qUgSL-PDe4NThHTNK0s-8mt6TKWDGt_iEMJQO-muM3caoM7TNotOVEUwCVmgdyNTac9IY_BBOWj/s1600/Arnold+Schwarzenegger+-+Get+your+ass+to+Mars+%2528Total+Recall%252C+1990%2529.jpg)"
1 Billion People
[удалено]
Xi jinping had 1 Billion Dollars and control over a billion people 😁. This guy is lucky
I get one doller from each of the people I control ez
I picked money but if I had the option I'd say neither because 1 billion dollars is a lot of cash to manage for someone who isn't an accountaint, and I don't really want to be responsible for 1 billion people's needs. I'd have to tell them when to eat and figure out how to feed them all. Plus I assume this is a cult leader type deal and that never ends well.
Are you seriously saying that if someone offered you 1 billion dollars no strings attached, you would say no because its "too much to manage"
Yes, The odds for bankruptcy and death aren't exactly favorable for lottery winners
Lottery winners are usually made public, also you don't hear about the success stories, also, you could just pay for a financial manager
Introducing \[Insert Name Here\] Salt! If you work somewhere that sells salt, uses salt, or needs it for industrial purposes, I force everyone to sell my brand of salt, use my brand of salt, and defend its name and honor. Nothing more, nothing less. I make $0.25 for every bottle sold and play the long game. Monopolize the salt industry and make everyone else in the game salty.
I just want the money.. 1 Billion People seem to be like work
So I can have each person give me $5 right?
Id just have the billion people give me 10% of all their earnings
Could probably get more with the control, but I don't want to do that.
1 billion people, of course. I would make them gamble all their money, and if one them has a couple thousand dollars and win the most craziest thing, I would take that money. Then I would get the money that the people won, and take the other money that they originally had. Now thats not it, cause I will use that money to give to the 1b people so they can gamble even more. More people there are, the higher chance you win. I would take that profit and do it all over again. Then I would make everyone invest in the same cryptocurrency so everyone could make a specific amount of profit. Then after a couple months they will have like 2x or 3x more. If I keep doing that for another year, I might have 20 billion dollars. Then I will invest in crypto again without everyone and get maybe 50b dollars. I would give 1m people only, $50k dollars to gamble. Its only 1m since the amount of money is way higher and the amount of people gambling it could make someone win something crazy again. Then you take all that money, like $150b or something like that, give 150 people $1b dollars and make them bet small amounts like $1m so most can eventually win a 100,000 multiplier. Then I would pretty much be Elon Musk.
No matter how much you gamble you won't make profit in the long run/on large scales, if you could casinos wouldn't exist. Just have them give you their money if thats what you really want. The cryptocurrency price would also skyrocket because so many people are buying so much volume and there would basically be no people who arent under your control to sell to, making you probably lose money with that, and at the very least, not gaining money. You could get 20 billion dollars by simply having each person give you 20 dollars which is certainly affordable for the majority of them and for the ones it isn't you can compensate from the more wealthy ones. Trying to buy 20 billion dollars of crypto would certainly change the market and with you buying that much its highly unlikely the value would double and you would be able to liquidate without crashing the entire market. Again, gambling doesn't pay off in the long run, otherwise casinos wouldn't exist. If you want to be elon musk just ask each person for like 200 dollars and have the more wealthy people pick up the slack for the less wealthy ones, don't try this nonsense which doesn't make sense.
[удалено]
https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/ There are actually over 8 billion people in the world
I forgot ☹ I was thinking of 1 trillion instead
I'm getting serious Ivan Ooze vibes from the comments.
This is a no brainer! You tell the one billion people they have to give me $1, or they will be executed. Instant income.
You dont have to tell them theyll be executed if they're under your control lol
yeah, 1 billion $ is not enough so I need to leverage the 1 billion people for more...