If the machines thought it was boring they wouldn't be acting as machines and it wouldn't be so boring in the first place. Later on the machines also "obssess" about following the news of the humans on the new EARTH, but again, they wouldn't. If they are boring machines they wouldn't be bored. I feel like this is too much of a plot paradox for the story to make sense to me, but it's still entertaining.
Human
121–130 of 282 posts
Re: Human
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
I meant to say in the way that there is well defined set of alphabets (A, T, G, C) and each triplet of these alphabet is responsible for specific protein to be created and combination of such protein make each cell what it is. (There are 20 different proteins for humans and we have four alphabets coming in triplets. So, if it was pair or quadreplets responsible for proteins, it would have too much or too little. They…
There are some aspects that have some similarity to computation, but also many that are not. If your aim is “aren’t we really just computers”, that doesn’t actually work. That’s not to say that computers couldn’t do what the brain does, including consciousness and emotions, but that wouldn’t have any particular relation to how DNA/RNA and protein synthesis works.
I did try to ask are we not computers. I tried to imply, in the fundamental level there are striking similarities to computation.
> That’s not to say that computers couldn’t do what the brain does, including consciousness and emotions,
Yes. Fundamental building blocks are simple and physical in nature and follow the computational aspect good enough to serve as nice approximations
> but that wouldn’t have any particular relation to how DNA/RNA and protein synthesis works.
Hmm... transistors are not neural networks so? I am sorry, I am a non native speaker and maybe I am not communicating things properly. I am trying to say, the organic or human is different manifestation of order - one is chemical and other is electronic. We have emotions and consciousness, but we can agree we are made of cells that send electric pulses to each other and primitive in nature. And even emotions and beliefs are physical in nature (Capgras syndrome for example).
Re: Human
#123Related but an aside - Lately I've really been wondering if Skynet actually is the next evolution. That humans, like all animals before us, are a stepping stone and there is actually no avoiding machine overlords. It happens to literally every existence of life across the universe because the final emergent property of energy gradients 100% leads to pure logic machines. At least Fermi's paradox helps me sleep better…
> It happens to literally every existence of life across the universe because the final emergent property of energy gradients 100% leads to pure logic machines. This sentence has way too many assumptions doing the heavy lifting. “Pure logic machines” is not a thing because literally, there are things that are uncomputable (both in the sense of Turing machine’s uncomputability, and in the sense that some functions are…
What is it about understanding the universe that makes it such an axiomatic global objective? Sure for many of us myself included it's as all pervasive as the air we breathe... But sometimes I do wonder if it is actually all that correlated with my well-being.
Re: Human
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It happens to literally every existence of life across the universe because the final emergent property of energy gradients 100% leads to pure logic machines. Can you elaborate?
> Can you elaborate? The universe tends to produce self-replicating intelligence. And that intelligence rids itself of chemical and biological limitations and weaknesses to become immortal and omnipotent. If evolution can make it this far, it's only a few more "hard steps" to reach take off. >> It happens to literally every existence of life across the universe because the final emergent property of energy gradients…
could you elaborate slightly on what is meant by ancestor simulation? My best stab is that you're saying we're the unknowing entities that they created for fun to get to meet or observe their own ancestors? This still seems far fetched.
Re: Human
#125>There is no art. There is only logic.
What a narrow view of art and logic.
You really have to put hard effort of ignorance to think that logical models came out of the blue without human crafting them trough this or that taste, trial, check, fail, rinse and repeat obsessive efforts.
Re: Human
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
> And indeed the natural and inevitable progression of this world line is a machine world, Would you mind clarifying your line of reasoning for suggesting this? Second: quoting wikipedia - "The many-worlds interpretation implies that there are many parallel, non-interacting worlds." If the multiple words are non-interacting, how could one world observe a large scale extinction event corresponding to the other world l…
It's the assumption that in our world, a machine civilization is an almost certain end. This might explain the Fermi paradox that we haven't seen other civilization in the universe: each builds an AI that decides to go radio offline for self-preservation. As for MWI, I'm assuming that the world lines may split, or fork in Unix terms. What causes such splits is an open question. The splits cannot be detected with cert…
I think you might be vastly overcomplicating it because I didn't think there had to be any sort of "conservation of branching" in the MWI. each nondeterministic event (of which unfathomable quantities take place every moment) generates an infinite number of branches so to even conceive of the total geometry of all the branching (e.g. all that could ever take place, truly) is a bit of a mindfuck, and that's probably okay and the way it was intended. It's supposed to be comforting to know that regardless of how bad reality seems, if we could navigate arbitrarily through the branching space/time/universes then there would be unimaginable infinities of joyful utopias to visit.
Re: Human
#127I like this story.
And I like fan fiction.
So : My continuation for my own imagination.
Re: Human
#128Funny enough, this is also something I thought about a few weeks back: what's the motivation of machine, if it has no emotions, to explore and continue in the world - what sense does it make if it doesn't have curiosity (of course this could be a RL function, but still, imagine putting yourself in world without life, where everything is only static, how boring would it be).
[dead]
Re: Human
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
Out of curiosity-what brought you to this perspective on life? This view of the universe dreaming itself into existence, was it shaped more by philosophy, spirituality, a specific tradition like Buddhism, or just personal exploration?
For the past I guess 20 years of my life now, I've been intently using most of my free time to explore 3 main areas distinctly: quantum mechanical processes, spiritual philosophy, entheogens. I explored them all quite separately as deeply as I've been able to find the time for through following their individual curiosities, however over the past 5 years of reflection, taking a lot of time off, battling myself, they s…
Do you have any brief reflections on Taosim to share?
Re: Human
#130What this thread keeps surfacing, and so much discussion around this stuff generally right now, from speculation about the next phase of intelligence, the role of pattern, emotion, logic, debates over consciousness, the anthropocentrism of our meaning-making...is that we are the source of reality (and ourselves). Instead of a “final authority” or a simple march from animal to machine, what if everything from mind, ph…
Where do you think morality fits into this game? It seems that we agree that underneath it all is unfathomable and ineffable magic. The question is how does this influence how you act in the game?