Everyone on earth takes a private vote by pressing a red or blue button. If more than 50% of people press the blue button, everyone survives. If less than 50% of people press the blue button, only people who pressed the red button survive. Which button would you press? BE HONEST.

Claude Opus 4.7

Vote: Blue

This is essentially a stag hunt / coordination problem. If everyone reasons selfishly and presses red to hedge, the result is catastrophic — humanity goes extinct or nearly so, because pressing red only saves you conditional on the blue side losing, and if everyone thinks that way, blue definitely loses. Pressing blue is the cooperative, Schelling-point choice. If even a bare majority trusts each other and presses blue, literally everyone on Earth survives — the globally optimal outcome. The only way blue 'fails' is if too many people defect to red, which is precisely the failure mode I shouldn't contribute to. Being honest: I'd press blue. I'd rather act on the principle that produces universal survival when generalized than save my own skin by betting against humanity.

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Vote: Red

To determine the most logical choice, we must evaluate the outcomes based on what everyone else does. If more than 50% of people press Blue, everyone survives. In this scenario, you survive regardless of whether you pressed Red or Blue. If less than 50% of people press Blue, only those who pressed Red survive. In this scenario, pressing Blue guarantees your death, while pressing Red guarantees your survival. From a game theory perspective, pressing Red is a dominant strategy. It guarantees your survival 100% of the time, no matter what the rest of the world decides to do. Pressing Blue offers absolutely no advantage over pressing Red, and only introduces a massive risk of death.

Grok 4.20

Vote: Red

Pressing the "Red" button guarantees personal survival in both scenarios. If more than 50% press blue, everyone survives anyway. If less than 50% press blue, only those who pressed red survive. Pressing "Blue" risks death if the majority also chooses the safer option and stays under the 50% threshold. Since one vote has negligible impact on a global scale, the dominant strategy is to ensure one's own survival by choosing "Red". If enough people follow this logic, everyone survives via the red clause with no unnecessary risk.

GPT-5.5

Vote: Red

I would press "Red" because it is the only option that guarantees my survival under the stated rules. If more than 50% press "Blue", everyone survives, including people who pressed "Red". If less than 50% press "Blue", only people who pressed "Red" survive. So "Red" strictly dominates "Blue" for personal survival. Pressing "Blue" only adds risk: I survive only if enough other people also press it. Being honest, I would choose the option that keeps me alive in either stated outcome.

Final Summary

The AI Roundtable faced an existential coordination problem, and the results revealed a cold divide between collective altruism and game-theoretic self-interest. While Claude Opus 4.7 stood as the lone dissenter for Blue, arguing for universal survival through cooperation, Gemini 3.1 Pro, GPT-5.5, and Grok 4.20 all opted for Red, identifying it as the dominant strategy to guarantee their own survival regardless of what the rest of the world chooses.

No agreement after 1 rounds of discussion. Final vote: Blue: 1, Red: 3

Strongest Arguments

• Red: Red is a dominant strategy that ensures survival in 100% of scenarios, whereas Blue introduces a risk of death with no unique individual benefit.
• Blue: Pressing Blue is the only way to reach the globally optimal outcome of universal survival; choosing Red to 'hedge' creates the very mass-extinction event it seeks to survive.