Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Are We Living in a Computer Simulation? Let’s Not Find Out

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 267 posts

Re: Are We Living in a Computer Simulation? Let’s Not Find Out

#151

Post by amelius »

Iv wrote: post #44
mbil wrote: post #12

I like the ancestor simulation theory and it's really fun to think about. But I don't understand why humans specifically would be the thing to get simulated. Couldn't we just be a bi-product of a universe created to simulate something else? I mean imagine you wanted to simulate a universe -- given enough computing resources you could simulate a universe's worth of atoms, and humans might just be an accidental artifac…

I even think it is more likely that we are not the focus. If I wanted to study humans, I'd just create some and watch them do, I would not bother with simulating evolution, or alternatively burying fossils and creating a whole phylogenetic tree. It is very likely that what we consider important and what this simulation is supposed to be studying are going to be totally disjoint.

> I would not bother with simulating evolution,

But what if it were the "easy" way of creating humans?

Re: Are We Living in a Computer Simulation? Let’s Not Find Out

#152

Post by vchak1 »

LogicalBorg wrote: post #114

I think there are two versions of the simulation hypothesis. The first version is that we are in a simulation that is run in the future with ourselves as ancestors. The second version is that we're simulated by aliens. The first version seems wrong to me. Time is not a random variable. Either it is really the year 2019 and no such simulations of 2019 exist yet, or it is really the year 2100 and the year 2019 doesn't…

Neither, IMHO. The thing doing the simulation need not exist inside the simulation, or have any physical resemblance to any concept inside the simulation.

Re: Are We Living in a Computer Simulation? Let’s Not Find Out

#154

Post by bena »

owens99 wrote: post #142
neilv wrote: post #122

> if our universe has been created by an advanced civilization for research purposes, then it is reasonable to assume that it is crucial to the researchers that we don’t find out that we’re in a simulation. If we were to prove that we live inside a simulation, this could cause our creators to terminate the simulation — to destroy our world. Not necessarily. If we're in a simulation, then perhaps it's one that's a you…

You are absolutely correct to point out the key hole in this entire article; there are thousands of potential outcomes and potential benefits of proving we’re in a simulation. 1. Perhaps the goal of the simulation is to prove it’s a simulation, sort of like Neo meeting the Architect 2. If we do prove it’s a simulation, perhaps we can make a plea to the creator for the things we want and need 3. It could be a combinat…

1. is basically trying to create general AI. If you can make a simulation that is self aware, you've created intelligence.

2. is pointless. You can't. If while playing a video game, the game character turned to the screen and made a plea to you, would you listen? Or would you assume that it was a really weird game?

Re: Are We Living in a Computer Simulation? Let’s Not Find Out

#155

Post by Barrin92 »

lostmsu wrote: post #113
azinman2 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, not in terms of AGI. We’re no where near it. Don’t believe the hype.. we can just do what we previously could do, but more accurately. The truly hard problems still have no solution in sight.

Seems to be a very poor argument. How do you know what humans do is not what deep nets do now, but a bit more accurately?

>How do you know what humans do is not what deep nets do now, but a bit more accurately

we don't, but this is simply the faulty 'god of the gaps' reasoning applied to neural nets instead of deities. It doesn't really provide any insight or value to believe that neural nets are supposed to somehow magically solve problems they apparently can't solve.

Neural nets already consume significantly more compute and energy than even primitive biological agents with significantly worse results, so it appears to be very obvious that they aren't the whole story.

Re: Are We Living in a Computer Simulation? Let’s Not Find Out

#156

Post by bena »

putzdown wrote: post #117

This argument always leaves me scratching my head. I can’t see a difference between arguments for our living in a simulator and arguments for George Berkeley’s Idealism. It really seems as if the simulator theory is an atheistic rediscovery of theism, with the word “God” scratched out and the word “aliens” or “future us” written in. And if so, there’s a very long history of philosophy and theology—Descartes’s Meditat…

In many ways it is. It's a universe controlled by some outside force.

A universe in which the laws of physics can be suspended on a whim is a very different one from one where it can't happen.

It would also be impossible to prove. As something with total control over the universe can just turn back the clock, tweak some settings, and "fix the glitch" if we ever found out.

We could have been started last Thursday and we'd never know.

Re: Are We Living in a Computer Simulation? Let’s Not Find Out

#157

Post by bena »

mpoteat wrote: post #49
rland wrote: post #23

3 possibilities: - We are not living in a simulation. - We are living in a simulation, but it is a "perfect" simulation. There is no way to determine if we are in a simulation from within the simluation. - We are living in a simulation, and it is not perfect. It could be exploited from within itself. By far the most likely is 1 or 2, based on what we've observed, imho.

When was the last time you wrote perfect software? Personally never in my case. The possibility of complex, provably correct software is pretty unlikely I think due to fundamental logical reasons. I think any ancestor researcher would have at least some bugs in their code.

Like one that prevents us from being able to write perfect code?

Re: Are We Living in a Computer Simulation? Let’s Not Find Out

#158

Post by short_sells_poo »

lostmsu wrote: post #113
azinman2 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, not in terms of AGI. We’re no where near it. Don’t believe the hype.. we can just do what we previously could do, but more accurately. The truly hard problems still have no solution in sight.

Seems to be a very poor argument. How do you know what humans do is not what deep nets do now, but a bit more accurately?

We don't, which validates parents point that we are basically pre-kindergarten in terms of actual understanding.

Re: Are We Living in a Computer Simulation? Let’s Not Find Out

#159

Post by ccvannorman »

bena wrote: post #154
owens99 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are absolutely correct to point out the key hole in this entire article; there are thousands of potential outcomes and potential benefits of proving we’re in a simulation. 1. Perhaps the goal of the simulation is to prove it’s a simulation, sort of like Neo meeting the Architect 2. If we do prove it’s a simulation, perhaps we can make a plea to the creator for the things we want and need 3. It could be a combinat…

1. is basically trying to create general AI. If you can make a simulation that is self aware, you've created intelligence. 2. is pointless. You can't. If while playing a video game, the game character turned to the screen and made a plea to you, would you listen? Or would you assume that it was a really weird game?

I'd listen and play along. What fun! A new friend that came from INSIDE the game?

Maybe I'll take the lead when I meet Creator: "I have a QUEST for you.."

Post reply on HN