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

Wild Ideas

hanson.gmu.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 166 posts

Re: Wild Ideas

#31

Post by goldfeld »

wikiburner wrote: post #22
clamprecht wrote: post #5

I have a "science-fictiony" idea that I haven't seen anywhere else yet. The idea is this: If we can see light from planets thousands of light years away, then we can see the past. Once our telescopes are good enough to basically do a "google maps" zoom-in on other planets, we will be able to watche the past on other planets. But then, if we can ever watch our own Earth from a thousand light years away, then we can se…

Here's an even crazier version: we develop a quantum computer the size of Jupiter with seemingly infinite computational capacity, and "scan" and simulate the earth. Similar to how a sufficiently advanced AI application today could probably take an overview picture of a pool table at any point in a game, and deduce the past shots that had to be taken in order for it to result in it's current state, you might be able t…

That sounds enticing, but I think you could never rewind the state of the Earth without considering the variables external to it. If you couldn't also simulate anything that could alter the course of events, such as exposure to the Sun, I think you'd end up accumulating enough lossy transitions that the simulation would be rendered (ha) worthless in a deterministic sense.

If we consider that only simulating the atoms contained within the Earth is enough to have a perfect understanding of it's state across time, by logical conclusion simulating a house would be enough to rewind the history of it's structure.

Re: Wild Ideas

#32

Post by AsymetricCom »

bumbledraven wrote: post #19

1. Many times each day, your mind permanently splits into different versions that live in different worlds. True. 2. If medicine were taxed so much that people only bought half as much, they would be just as healthy. False. The "extra" spending in medicine drives innovations so we have better drugs & procedures etc. than we would otherwise. 3. If we keep writing down common sense datums until 2100, we can make comput…

How could 4 be maybe and 5 be true?

Re: Wild Ideas

#33

Post by bumbledraven »

IvyMike wrote: post #27
bumbledraven wrote: post #19

1. Many times each day, your mind permanently splits into different versions that live in different worlds. True. 2. If medicine were taxed so much that people only bought half as much, they would be just as healthy. False. The "extra" spending in medicine drives innovations so we have better drugs & procedures etc. than we would otherwise. 3. If we keep writing down common sense datums until 2100, we can make comput…

> False - to run simulate sentient beings with so much suffering would be cruel. I see you've never searched youtube for "The Sims".

I didn't realize the Sims were sentient.

Re: Wild Ideas

#34

Post by snowwrestler »

snitko wrote: post #11

The author is obviously some kind of crazy anarchist. Private law system? You mean that all of a sudden people would become customers of multiple legal firms instead of subjects of one big system and will be able to choose laws they like while at the same time not interfering directly with others who chose different laws? You mean that all of a sudden majority would lose its power to dictate minorities how to live th…

The strongest argument against private law is that that is how law used to operate, and our ancestors deemed it so unworkable that they invented the system of open public law we know today.

Re: Wild Ideas

#35

Post by bumbledraven »

AsymetricCom wrote: post #32
bumbledraven wrote: post #19

1. Many times each day, your mind permanently splits into different versions that live in different worlds. True. 2. If medicine were taxed so much that people only bought half as much, they would be just as healthy. False. The "extra" spending in medicine drives innovations so we have better drugs & procedures etc. than we would otherwise. 3. If we keep writing down common sense datums until 2100, we can make comput…

How could 4 be maybe and 5 be true?

Maybe important parts of our personality are in the nerves of our spines and guts. Also, maybe important information in the brain is lost during freezing. Otherwise, yes, #4 is true.

Re: Wild Ideas

#36

Post by staccatomeasure »

aasarava wrote: post #13

#2, about health insurance, overlooks a big part of the RAND HIE's findings: people who were sick and poor in the study did have worse health outcomes.

It's just a bad argument in general...saying that because people spend 30% more when stuff is free (without improved results) means they have twice as much as they need. It doesn't follow, at all.

Re: Wild Ideas

#37

Post by gnaritas »

derefr wrote: post #28
snitko wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Extracting all info out of the brains would be impractical. A lot of the things humans do we do because we are humans. Our emotions only make sense because they are mechanisms of survival and passing our genes. They would be quite impractical in a singularity (although, some other emotions, specific to the digital world, may be employed). So in a sense, I can only see one force in a post-singularity utopia, driving p…

All of the things humans do, we do because we are humans. There is no "natural set of universal goals for sentient beings"; we simply like what evolution has made us like. Changing (and especially removing ) our terminal goals is the same as creating a new species with no relation to us. Why would we want to do that?

Because why would I care if I change species if it keeps my consciousness alive?

Re: Wild Ideas

#38

Post by snitko »

snowwrestler wrote: post #34
snitko wrote: post #11

The author is obviously some kind of crazy anarchist. Private law system? You mean that all of a sudden people would become customers of multiple legal firms instead of subjects of one big system and will be able to choose laws they like while at the same time not interfering directly with others who chose different laws? You mean that all of a sudden majority would lose its power to dictate minorities how to live th…

The strongest argument against private law is that that is how law used to operate, and our ancestors deemed it so unworkable that they invented the system of open public law we know today.

Well, then maybe we could argue the same about religion: atheism and then pantheism didn't really work, so we invented organized religions with one major god. Relying on the wisdom of ancestors is a sure way to avoid growth and to not acquire knowledge, and it is precisely this trait in people through which they are usually manipulated.

Re: Wild Ideas

#39

Post by ShardPhoenix »

AsymetricCom wrote: post #32
bumbledraven wrote: post #19

1. Many times each day, your mind permanently splits into different versions that live in different worlds. True. 2. If medicine were taxed so much that people only bought half as much, they would be just as healthy. False. The "extra" spending in medicine drives innovations so we have better drugs & procedures etc. than we would otherwise. 3. If we keep writing down common sense datums until 2100, we can make comput…

How could 4 be maybe and 5 be true?

Just because you brain is frozen doesn't necessarily mean that it will stay that way for long enough, or that it will remain in a readable state.

Re: Wild Ideas

#40

Post by snowwrestler »

snitko wrote: post #38
snowwrestler wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The strongest argument against private law is that that is how law used to operate, and our ancestors deemed it so unworkable that they invented the system of open public law we know today.

Well, then maybe we could argue the same about religion: atheism and then pantheism didn't really work, so we invented organized religions with one major god. Relying on the wisdom of ancestors is a sure way to avoid growth and to not acquire knowledge, and it is precisely this trait in people through which they are usually manipulated.

Your analogy is backward; early civilizations were far more dominated by religious beliefs than we are today.
Post reply on HN