Live data from Hacker News

Centre for Applied Eschatology

appliedeschatology.com

31–40 of 73 posts

Re: Centre for Applied Eschatology

#31

Are they serious about pursuing the goal of ending the world? Or is this a joke? The response to 'How can I help?', namely 'You are surely helping already' seems like the biggest clue to me that this is a joke.

It is a joke. Some people may find it difficult to joke about (the desensitization problem), but not everyone evidently. As a joke, it has some sinister merit IMO.

Re: Centre for Applied Eschatology

#32
post #22

This reminded me of: QuantumBogoSort a quantum sorting algorithm which can sort any list in O(1), using the "many worlds" interpretation of quantum mechanics. It works as follows: 1. Quantumly randomise the list, such that there is no way of knowing what order the list is in until it is observed. This will divide the universe into O(n!) universes; however, the division has no cost, as it happens constantly anyway. 2.…

So let’s say I’ve got step 2. figured out with vacuum decay or similar, how do I check if the list is sorted in O(1) to determine if I destroy the universe or not?

And given that the list being sorted is a one in n! chance, often enormously less likely than than hardware malfunction, wouldn’t the algorithm mostly produce malfunctions rather than sorted lists?

(Genuinely curious if I’ve got the right understanding of the CS and potential physics.)

Re: Centre for Applied Eschatology

#33
post #11

“We’re working for no tomorrow, today.” “These and other factors make us confident that CAE and its partners can reduce uncertainty and accelerate the world to its ultimate end.” “CAE pursues applied and transdisciplinary research into several areas of global and existential catastrophe, focusing on those most likely to produce rapid and broad-based impact.” They sat they are not terrorists, not a religious group, no…

> broad dedication to not-ness

Ah, being the change they want to see.

Re: Centre for Applied Eschatology

#34

Are they serious about pursuing the goal of ending the world? Or is this a joke? The response to 'How can I help?', namely 'You are surely helping already' seems like the biggest clue to me that this is a joke.

It is a joke. Some people may find it difficult to joke about (the desensitization problem), but not everyone evidently. As a joke, it has some sinister merit IMO.

Anti-natalists going a step further

Re: Centre for Applied Eschatology

#35
post #22

This reminded me of: QuantumBogoSort a quantum sorting algorithm which can sort any list in O(1), using the "many worlds" interpretation of quantum mechanics. It works as follows: 1. Quantumly randomise the list, such that there is no way of knowing what order the list is in until it is observed. This will divide the universe into O(n!) universes; however, the division has no cost, as it happens constantly anyway. 2.…

[deleted]

Re: Centre for Applied Eschatology

#36

As with most technical challenges, scale is always an issue. Depopulating a city is relatively easy and achievable with conventional bombs. A small country would only be moderately more difficult with nuclear weapons. After this, things get much harder. Sure, enough nukes could finish off the human race, but that's out of the price range for most shoppers in this market. In the long term, climate change might do it,…

> Sure, enough nukes could finish off the human race, but that's out of the price range for most shoppers in this market. I dunno, there's plenty of nukes that are ready and waiting and have been paid for. I wonder what would be more effective; nuking the targets that have been designated by various states already since the cold war, or piling up all the nukes, maybe a few km underground, and trigger a cataclysmic ev…

A video on "what happens if we pile up all the nukes and set them off":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyECrGp-Sw8

Re: Centre for Applied Eschatology

#37

Are they serious about pursuing the goal of ending the world? Or is this a joke? The response to 'How can I help?', namely 'You are surely helping already' seems like the biggest clue to me that this is a joke.

I liked this one:

Q: Why do you want to end the world?

A: CAE is devoted to practical, pragmatic solutions. We’re interested in the how, not the why.

Re: Centre for Applied Eschatology

#38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sure, enough nukes could finish off the human race, but that's out of the price range for most shoppers in this market. I dunno, there's plenty of nukes that are ready and waiting and have been paid for. I wonder what would be more effective; nuking the targets that have been designated by various states already since the cold war, or piling up all the nukes, maybe a few km underground, and trigger a cataclysmic ev…

A video on "what happens if we pile up all the nukes and set them off": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyECrGp-Sw8

Amazing :)

I really should watch more of their videos, I'd forgotten how brilliant they are.

Re: Centre for Applied Eschatology

#39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A video on "what happens if we pile up all the nukes and set them off": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyECrGp-Sw8

Amazing :) I really should watch more of their videos, I'd forgotten how brilliant they are.

They also do one on "what happens if a single modern nuclear weapon is exploded over a city" - but I think the BBC did a better job:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GJttnC8PoA&t=16s

[Edit: And by 'better job' I mean scared me witless as a teenager]

Re: Centre for Applied Eschatology

#40
post #22

This reminded me of: QuantumBogoSort a quantum sorting algorithm which can sort any list in O(1), using the "many worlds" interpretation of quantum mechanics. It works as follows: 1. Quantumly randomise the list, such that there is no way of knowing what order the list is in until it is observed. This will divide the universe into O(n!) universes; however, the division has no cost, as it happens constantly anyway. 2.…

Won't any quantum "destroy the universe" operation result in one destroyed universe and one that isn't?
Post reply on HN