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

What’s expected of us (2005)

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 57 posts

Re: What’s expected of us (2005)

#21

Post by inimino »

adamjb wrote: post #18
AntiImperialist wrote: post #17

Interesting. However, I disagree that if such a machine existed, people would lose motivation. They'd realize that the rational part of the brain is used just for rationalization and is not always actively engaged in real-time decision-making... but that's about it. They'd then beat the machine with little practice, regardless of how it is implemented.

The machine in the story doesn't read minds. >The heart of each Predictor is a circuit with a negative time delay — it sends a signal back in time. If a Predictor was hooked up to a geiger counter instead of a button, the light would flash exactly one second before the counter would click. It would flash even before the decay occurred. I don't see any way to beat that.

It doesn't mean that you don't have free will, it just means that during a one-second loop, you are constrained to logically consistent choices. You can't choose to fool yourself about your future behavior during that one second.

Re: What’s expected of us (2005)

#22

Post by inimino »

praptak wrote: post #19

One second is plenty of time to react by stopping your hand. So what happens if I train myself to slowly move my hand towards the button and only stop when seeing the light?

Then the light doesn't come on (at least until you start to entertain the idea of hitting the button after all...).

Re: What’s expected of us (2005)

#23

Post by inopinatus »

ohazi wrote: post #11

This reminds me of Sam Hughes' (@qntm) work. If you liked this, you might also like: http://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/antimemetics-division-hub https://qntm.org/ra https://qntm.org/structure

Warning. The SCP wiki is a memetic attentional infohazard designed by [REDACTED] to destabilise and capture the productivity of curious and/or creative individuals and channel it towards a currently unknown goal. Visitors are reminded to monitor their usage carefully. Early warning signs of contamination by the SCP wiki include: procrastination with regard to less interesting work; signing up for an account in order to "write a fun log entry" (particularly in respect of SCPs 914 and 682); difficulty sleeping "because you're not sure if this should be Euclid or Keter"; referring to the Doctor but qualifying this as "Gears or Kondraki. Not the British one"; sketching humanoid statues composed of rebar, concrete and Krylon spray paint. If more than ten (10) tabs containing pages of the SCP wiki are open simultaneously then the browser should be closed immediately by any available third party, the victim removed from the vicinity of all networked computing devices, and instructed to get back to work before the acute fascination leads to a loss of executive function, livelihood, marriage etc.

Re: What’s expected of us (2005)

#24

Post by praptak »

inimino wrote: post #22
praptak wrote: post #19

One second is plenty of time to react by stopping your hand. So what happens if I train myself to slowly move my hand towards the button and only stop when seeing the light?

Then the light doesn't come on (at least until you start to entertain the idea of hitting the button after all...).

My point is that this device proves more than non-existence of free will. It requires inability to react to visual stimulus within 1 second timeframe.

I mean I can construct a robot which does the same - moves its arm towards the button and only stops when either the button is pressed or the light comes on.

Re: What’s expected of us (2005)

#25

Post by TeMPOraL »

praptak wrote: post #24
inimino wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then the light doesn't come on (at least until you start to entertain the idea of hitting the button after all...).

My point is that this device proves more than non-existence of free will. It requires inability to react to visual stimulus within 1 second timeframe. I mean I can construct a robot which does the same - moves its arm towards the button and only stops when either the button is pressed or the light comes on.

You say you can construct such robot, but in fact, you can't. That's because if you could, then it would cause a paradox with a predictor. So you can't (though it may be fun watching you try).

Don't mess with time travel.

Re: What’s expected of us (2005)

#26

Post by cortesoft »

alex_young wrote: post #14

If the Predictor is just a light which monitors your mental state, then yes, this already exists, and with similar implications: https://www.wired.com/2008/04/mind-decision/

I feel like this doesn't have quite the same implications... the fact that our brain is thinking thoughts before we become conscious of them is coherent, and doesn't conflict with free will.... and in fact, it kinda makes sense... if thoughts are a physical process, it makes sense that the physical process would have to start before it becomes conscious to you.

Re: What’s expected of us (2005)

#27

Post by hvdfhbj »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #25
praptak wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is that this device proves more than non-existence of free will. It requires inability to react to visual stimulus within 1 second timeframe. I mean I can construct a robot which does the same - moves its arm towards the button and only stops when either the button is pressed or the light comes on.

You say you can construct such robot, but in fact, you can't. That's because if you could, then it would cause a paradox with a predictor. So you can't (though it may be fun watching you try). Don't mess with time travel.

I spent way too long thinking about this and getting annoyed before remembering that Predictors aren't real.

Re: What’s expected of us (2005)

#28

Post by jerome-jh »

aesyondu wrote: post #16
AntiImperialist wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'll be surprised to know that this exists https://www.i-dont-care-about-cookies.eu/ and even more surprised to find out why it exists.

Brilliant, thank you! Sad to see there is no extension for Safari, however.

You'd be even even more surprised to learn uBlock can block GPDR banners and works for Safari (and of course Firefox on MacOS). The blocking has to be enabled: in the "uBlock preferences (dashboard) >> Filters Lists >> Annoyances" check all the boxes.

Re: What’s expected of us (2005)

#29

Post by jerome-jh »

hvdfhbj wrote: post #27
TeMPOraL wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You say you can construct such robot, but in fact, you can't. That's because if you could, then it would cause a paradox with a predictor. So you can't (though it may be fun watching you try). Don't mess with time travel.

I spent way too long thinking about this and getting annoyed before remembering that Predictors aren't real.

They are real and this is the future of advertising.

Re: What’s expected of us (2005)

#30

Post by praptak »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #25
praptak wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is that this device proves more than non-existence of free will. It requires inability to react to visual stimulus within 1 second timeframe. I mean I can construct a robot which does the same - moves its arm towards the button and only stops when either the button is pressed or the light comes on.

You say you can construct such robot, but in fact, you can't. That's because if you could, then it would cause a paradox with a predictor. So you can't (though it may be fun watching you try). Don't mess with time travel.

My point exactly - the existence of the Predictor proves more than lack of free will. It's lack of free will, so we are automatons that respond to stimuli in a deterministic way, sure.

But there are also some strong restrictions on the set of reactions that are allowed, for example none of them can lead to a functioning counter-predictor robot.

Post reply on HN