11 replies to this topic

[modelcadet]

Nick Bostrom will contend that we are most likely living in a simulation. I contend that if we are living in a simulation, we each individually must most reasonably assume that we are the center of that simulation, and of the likely purpose of this simulation. If we are living in a simulation, there must be a probability distribution for different simulation scenarios. If I were just some guy on a couch in a post-Singularity world, and I were to create a simulation for myself, I would most likely want to simulate a life in which I, personally, bring about the Positive Technological Singularity.
With Occam's razor sharpened on the existential void, I embrace a transegocentric view of my metaphysical existence. I know for a certainty that I will bring about, with my actions, the PTS.

[Luna]

Great, the bible all over.

[Cyberbrain]

I contend that if we are living in a simulation, we each individually must most reasonably assume that we are the center of that simulation, and of the likely purpose of this simulation.

What if you were just a clever AI who's purpose is small and meaningless compared to the bigger scheme of things in the simulation. There is an infinite amount of possibilities for what may be real, each having an equal chance to being true.

Example,

1. life may be a dream
2. we may be in a matrix or simulation
3. we might be the result of one big great thought
4. the universe may be one in a sea of infinite universes
5. this could all be the result of supernatural being
6. this may be the result of our own doing
7. maybe we are reliving our lives in a loop
8. maybe we are reliving the life of someone else
9. maybe you are in a truman show
10. maybe I'm real and everyone else is an illusion
11. maybe we're part of an alien experiment
12. maybe we're part of a quantum computer
13. maybe everything is just meaningless
13. and so forth ...

I know for a certainty that I will bring about, with my actions, the PTS.

Thats one scenario in an infinite amount of scenario's.

But due to the uncertainty to what may be real, lets not dwell in delusion or fantasy.

Edited by Kostas, 24 May 2008 - 07:08 PM.

[John_Ventureville]

modelcadet wrote:
>I know for a certainty that I will bring about, with my actions, the PTS.

If you are able to access any pulldown menus that control reality, please let me know. I really want to modify my personal character sheet stats and abilities...

John : )

[Cyberbrain]

Great, the bible all over.

Exactly.

Due to the uncertainty of what may be real and what the nature of life is, I make the assumption that this universe, and hence this life, is the ultimate reality and that free will is not an illusion. That only what I observe with my five senses is true.

Taking this assumption into account, my main purpose is then to maximize my well being and survival according to my observations of this world.

Dwelling in fantasy and delusion, such as religion and modelcadet assumptions, would only result in risk.

[Cyberbrain]

modelcadet wrote:
>I know for a certainty that I will bring about, with my actions, the PTS.

If you are able to access any pulldown menus that control reality, please let me know. I really want to modify my personal character sheet stats and abilities...

Ah yes, if modelcadet is indeed the center of this simulation, could you also modify my algorithm to make me richer?

[modelcadet]

modelcadet wrote:
>I know for a certainty that I will bring about, with my actions, the PTS.

If you are able to access any pulldown menus that control reality, please let me know. I really want to modify my personal character sheet stats and abilities...

John : )

That would be pretty cool, for sure. Download a hex editor into your brain and start rolling for unique magical items. I personally like the idea of the save/reload button on life. That would be most supremely awesome.
Back in reality, I did some work within my computer music studies on using a melodic interface (because speech isn't nearly so accurate just yet). My dream for when I move into my room next year is to set up some microphones so that, when given a melodic cue, I can start outputting with various effects and loops.

Great, the bible all over.

That'd be nice. Seems almost anything would be more beneficial to Humanity than Christianity. But seriously, though, I was thinking about this: what if we made a website, called it Bible2.0 or some jazz, and just had people put up parables and vote on metaphysical wisdom. I don't entirely know how it'd work, but alls I know is that you can slap a 2.0 label on just about anything! It's like the Wild West.

Exactly.

Due to the uncertainty of what may be real and what the nature of life is, I make the assumption that this universe, and hence this life, is the ultimate reality and that free will is not an illusion. That only what I observe with my five senses is true.

Taking this assumption into account, my main purpose is then to maximize my well being and survival according to my observations of this world.

Dwelling in fantasy and delusion, such as religion and modelcadet assumptions, would only result in risk.

Well, the point was that Nick Bostrom argues against you, that this is most likely a simulation. And free will? Are you fo serious? Take a step back, take a deep breath, and pause to realize just how ridiculous the notion of free will truly is. You actually have 6 senses. You're double counting the olfactory sense, and discounting the vestibular and kinesthetic senses. I'm glad you've done some logotherapy. Fantasy and delusion? Are not memes just as real as frogs and squirrels and nanobacteria? Any good investor knows that managing risk is essential to developing a robust return, that avoiding risk isn't always the best policy. I did ask for your thoughts. So keep em coming.

Ah yes, if modelcadet is indeed the center of this simulation, could you also modify my algorithm to make me richer?

I like to think of one type of singularity as the transition point from a scarcity economy to a surplus economy. So, ok. But I will point out. Under my logic, from your perpsective, it is not I, but you, that will bring about the PTS.

[Cyberbrain]

Well, the point was that Nick Bostrom argues against you, that this is most likely a simulation.

Wait, were you presenting your own beliefs or someones else?

And free will? Are you fo serious? Take a step back, take a deep breath, and pause to realize just how ridiculous the notion of free will truly is.

Well you got me there, I agree the notion of free will is debatable. To be honest I'm agnostic toward free will. But just because there has been a huge fad lately that free will is an illusion doesn't mean one has to abide by it. The only argument I can think against free will is that the universe by the laws of physics is deterministic, so essentially our lives are also an illusion in that they're just being played out like a movie.

Fantasy and delusion? Are not memes just as real as frogs and squirrels and nanobacteria?

Well I think thats more of a problem of language. In that, is blue real? Is love real? What qualifies as real?

Any good investor knows that managing risk is essential to developing a robust return, that avoiding risk isn't always the best policy.

Exactly. Now if I could only apply this to the stock market using a genetic algorithm, I'm in for business

[forever freedom]

Nick Bostrom will contend that we are most likely living in a simulation. I contend that if we are living in a simulation, we each individually must most reasonably assume that we are the center of that simulation, and of the likely purpose of this simulation. If we are living in a simulation, there must be a probability distribution for different simulation scenarios. If I were just some guy on a couch in a post-Singularity world, and I were to create a simulation for myself, I would most likely want to simulate a life in which I, personally, bring about the Positive Technological Singularity.
With Occam's razor sharpened on the existential void, I embrace a transegocentric view of my metaphysical existence. I know for a certainty that I will bring about, with my actions, the PTS.

I actually did think of that a while back. But i concluded that if i were the one creating the simulation, i would most likely want good things for me. So i decided that i would bet in the lottery thinking "ok here i am giving a chance to myself to see if i am the one who created this". The me outside the simulation would probably figure that at one point i would bet in the lottery because i always loved money, and he would make the simulation give me the lottery prize. Well then i made the bet and didn't get one number right.

Maybe the me outside the simulation wanted me to experience other things (maybe i already won the lottery in another simulation ), but well the chances that we are really in a self created matrix are soo slim that it is not even worth really considering it. There are too many factors, like if we will really get to the point where we can run such simulations, if, inside these simulations, we are actually the one in 6.5 billion of smart self conscious AIs that is "real", and on and on...

[lunarsolarpower]

Reading y'all's comments here reminds me of Dodgeball where Ben Stiller's character gets all huffy and goes on about how he "created himself". I really have to wonder how you can arrive at these types of conclusions while keeping Occam's razor in mind. Even if what you are presenting were true Oc's razor would slice it away quite handily IMO.

[Mind]

Occam's Razor would slice it down to "what I perceive/experience/sense is real". That is it. All other speculation is just adding complexity.

[Mixter]

This meme is not mainstream-ready but very interesting,
and the reasoning is pretty good.

It also beats mudkipz.