I think the thought process of people who spread those YouTube things is less “Oh, if I do this it will reduce my chance of [spectacularly gruesome details], so I’d better do it,” than “LOL, I should put this more places to be funny.”
I don’t really think so. If your hypothesis would be true, then there’d probably be different types of spam around, there wouldn’t be a reason why “[gruesome details]”-spam was so abundant in comparison to, say, snail ASCII art or whatever people might find more funny.
This very specific type of spam floating around seems to be evidence that some people actually assign a probability high enough (or are scared enough, although knowing that it’s bullshit, emotions can be strong) to share it, trying to avoid those gruesome details.
I don’t know much about the relative frequencies of different kinds of spam, so I don’t know how strong your point is. The most common meme repeated on the youtube videos I watch is of the form “[number of people who disliked this video] people are [insult related to video topic].” I spread these because I find them amusing. I’ve never encountered a piece of [gruesome details] spam, but I’m probably watching the wrong videos.
I don’t quite think those comments are meant to be amusing, it rather profits from the division (into likers vs. non-likers) that has already happened. Post a similar comment on Rebecca Black’s “Friday” music video (which has far more dislikes than likes), such as, maybe, “10 people are looking forward to the weekend, 30000 enjoy mondays more”, and your comment will—this does my hypothesis predict—be voted down, even though they might be as amusing as other, similar comments. I have encountered quite a lot of [gruesome details] spam a few years ago, and back then, when I was still younger, those did make me nervous, although I knew it was BS. I think those comments are now regularly marked as spam, downvoted and deleted, but simply the fact that they are downvoted shows that people don’t find them amusing, doesn’t it? [comparison of likers and dislikers] are indeed more common, but I think they are not because they are, from a neutral pov, amusing, either. Maybe we should do a survey?
I don’t quite think those comments are meant to be amusing, it rather profits from the division (into likers vs. non-likers) that has already happened. Post a similar comment on Rebecca Black’s “Friday” music video (which has far more dislikes than likes), such as, maybe, “10 people are looking forward to the weekend, 30000 enjoy mondays more”, and your comment will—this does my hypothesis predict—be voted down, even though they might be as amusing as other, similar comments.
I agree that they profit from the division between likers and dislikers. But I think the amusement comes from finding a creative way to insult a minority. If any of that sort of comment are on the Friday video, I predict they will be making fun of the minority of likers.
I have encountered quite a lot of [gruesome details] spam a few years ago, and back then, when I was still younger, those did make me nervous, although I knew it was BS. I think those comments are now regularly marked as spam, downvoted and deleted, but simply the fact that they are downvoted shows that people don’t find them amusing, doesn’t it?
The fact that they are spread shows that some people are either amused or nervous. The fact that they are downvoted shows that other people are both unamused and not nervous. I expect that the population of people who encounter them is split, with some proportion amused, some proportion nervous, and some proportion neither. Our question depends on the relative sizes of the first two factions.
I guess we can agree on that. Part of their spreading can definitely be credited to Pascal’s mugging. Other people might find them amusing (especially the original creators of those messages).
I also found different forms of Pascal’s mugging in different internet media: There are similar chain messages in instant messengers which promise you additional smileys / finding the love of your life within the next 24 hours / other [promised benefits] if you spread them. I guess these [promised benefits]-posts’ popularity can barely be attributed to people finding them amusing.
Of course, this is Pascal’s mugging for irrational people who believe in Omega / god / superstition.
But in the [gruesome details]-messages it’s not so very irrational, it depends on your utility function. Most people value themselves more than others, and rational egoists, having a utility function taking only their specific state of mind into account, could assign such a high negative utility to themselves being tortured and killed that it’s rational for them to spread the message.
Hmmm, I hadn’t thought of that. It seems as though it wouldn’t spread as effectively if that were the case, but it’s certainly possible that the motivation is merely ‘for the lulz’ rather than a successful Pascal’s mugging.
I think the thought process of people who spread those YouTube things is less “Oh, if I do this it will reduce my chance of [spectacularly gruesome details], so I’d better do it,” than “LOL, I should put this more places to be funny.”
I don’t really think so. If your hypothesis would be true, then there’d probably be different types of spam around, there wouldn’t be a reason why “[gruesome details]”-spam was so abundant in comparison to, say, snail ASCII art or whatever people might find more funny.
This very specific type of spam floating around seems to be evidence that some people actually assign a probability high enough (or are scared enough, although knowing that it’s bullshit, emotions can be strong) to share it, trying to avoid those gruesome details.
I don’t know much about the relative frequencies of different kinds of spam, so I don’t know how strong your point is. The most common meme repeated on the youtube videos I watch is of the form “[number of people who disliked this video] people are [insult related to video topic].” I spread these because I find them amusing. I’ve never encountered a piece of [gruesome details] spam, but I’m probably watching the wrong videos.
I don’t quite think those comments are meant to be amusing, it rather profits from the division (into likers vs. non-likers) that has already happened. Post a similar comment on Rebecca Black’s “Friday” music video (which has far more dislikes than likes), such as, maybe, “10 people are looking forward to the weekend, 30000 enjoy mondays more”, and your comment will—this does my hypothesis predict—be voted down, even though they might be as amusing as other, similar comments. I have encountered quite a lot of [gruesome details] spam a few years ago, and back then, when I was still younger, those did make me nervous, although I knew it was BS. I think those comments are now regularly marked as spam, downvoted and deleted, but simply the fact that they are downvoted shows that people don’t find them amusing, doesn’t it? [comparison of likers and dislikers] are indeed more common, but I think they are not because they are, from a neutral pov, amusing, either. Maybe we should do a survey?
I agree that they profit from the division between likers and dislikers. But I think the amusement comes from finding a creative way to insult a minority. If any of that sort of comment are on the Friday video, I predict they will be making fun of the minority of likers.
The fact that they are spread shows that some people are either amused or nervous. The fact that they are downvoted shows that other people are both unamused and not nervous. I expect that the population of people who encounter them is split, with some proportion amused, some proportion nervous, and some proportion neither. Our question depends on the relative sizes of the first two factions.
I guess we can agree on that. Part of their spreading can definitely be credited to Pascal’s mugging. Other people might find them amusing (especially the original creators of those messages).
I also found different forms of Pascal’s mugging in different internet media: There are similar chain messages in instant messengers which promise you additional smileys / finding the love of your life within the next 24 hours / other [promised benefits] if you spread them. I guess these [promised benefits]-posts’ popularity can barely be attributed to people finding them amusing.
Of course, this is Pascal’s mugging for irrational people who believe in Omega / god / superstition.
But in the [gruesome details]-messages it’s not so very irrational, it depends on your utility function. Most people value themselves more than others, and rational egoists, having a utility function taking only their specific state of mind into account, could assign such a high negative utility to themselves being tortured and killed that it’s rational for them to spread the message.
Hmmm, I hadn’t thought of that. It seems as though it wouldn’t spread as effectively if that were the case, but it’s certainly possible that the motivation is merely ‘for the lulz’ rather than a successful Pascal’s mugging.