AGI_69 t1_j514yxq wrote
We most likely live in simulation, so what you define as real - is probably another VR. That makes your whole argument actually pro-VR.
For the VR's that we going to create soon...
Even AI will be constrained by laws of physics. You cannot slow/speed up time, you can't travel faster than speed of light. Lot of experiences are extremely dangerous in real world. They can also be expensive and polluting environment.
Finally, I don't see why we can't have both. It's not competition. Balanced life will probably consist of some VR time and some this-simulation time.
raishak t1_j51c74y wrote
>We most likely live in simulation
This has always been a line of thinking with no practical use. Even if the current laws are just some abstract rulesets layered on top a real physical world (like code in a computer), you're still physically real in the world that's running your simulation, just maybe not in the form you thought you were. But without simulation theory, we are certainly not perceiving the true depth of what we physically are. The only point it generates that seems relevant is that we are in a "false" world. But how would we even know?
To me it just adds one or more arbitrary layer of complexity without producing any philosophical value.
AGI_69 t1_j51gh3h wrote
Simulation hypothesis has place in philosophy, whether or not you find it "practical".
The most convincing argument, is that every Universe that allows technological progress will ultimately contain billions (or more) simulations and therefore the probability that, this world is simulation is very high, compared to "real" Universe.
raishak t1_j524ofn wrote
I suppose that is reasonable at least on a basic level; an appeal to probability. I can generally appreciate ideas that remove the requirement for us to be in a special/improbable position.
Desperate_Food7354 t1_j5193pf wrote
What makes you think we live in a simulation? Multiverse seems just as likely and given so the odds are equally in either favor given infinity.
AGI_69 t1_j51bzcg wrote
Multiverse hypothesis does not change the probabilities of us being in simulation. Every Universe where technological civilization is possible, will also have billions (or more) simulations. Simulations are natural product of computation.
Desperate_Food7354 t1_j51nhuf wrote
The nature of infinity doesn't care, even if there are an infinite number of simulated universes there are also an infinite number of non-simulated universes, this gives no insight to whether you are in one or not.
AGI_69 t1_j51sfg5 wrote
You can't compare infinities like that. The infinite sets have different elements, so it's not mathematically correct to say that they are same size, or that probability in landing in any of them is equal.
More importantly, as far as we know, infinities exists only in mathematics - you are creating additional strong assumption here.
The simulation hypothesis only needs very weak assumptions compared to Multiverse AND infinite number of sub-universes
Desperate_Food7354 t1_j52gfjm wrote
I would assume a multiverse would contain a set larger than any possible simulated set considering they are offspring of the multiverse in which not every universe necessarily has simulated realities.
AGI_69 t1_j52jsmp wrote
Every universe that allows technological civilization will contain many simulations. Therefore, there will be more simulations, than real universes.
Desperate_Food7354 t1_j52zvwo wrote
Are you insinuating solipsism?
AGI_69 t1_j54bhkg wrote
No
Desperate_Food7354 t1_j57bhyh wrote
You would have no ability to prove otherwise though.
AGI_69 t1_j57fyp6 wrote
I don't see how solipsism is relevant in any way here. It's completely unrelated philosophical issue
Desperate_Food7354 t1_j57h2kv wrote
If simulation theory were to exist what is to say you wouldn't be the only one inside of it, and why would you even be simulated into this era where technology is limited, are the homeless drug addicted people in a simulation or just simulations for your own personal world view in which you diagnose as a simulation to fit to your own model of how you want the universe to be? It makes no sense for this world / time period to be simulated.
AGI_69 t1_j57v0yz wrote
Quite the opposite, the era just before AI is invented is perfect for simulation. It's the most interesting era in human history. Once AI is invented, humans will not be the ones doing all the progress, they will just watch AI do everything better.
As to, who is simulated and who isn't, that's separate issue. Personally, I chose to treat everyone as equal to me. But I disagree, that just because homeless people exists, the simulation hypothesis is false.
Desperate_Food7354 t1_j58zbn4 wrote
Not that it is false but would imply real suffering and tragedy, who would choose to simulate themselves in this era as a suffering person who knows nothing of ai lmao or terminal brain cancer etc
OldWorldRevival t1_j515it4 wrote
Yes... but that's missing the point.
The point is that you can experience a lot of things, but they're just things at the end of the day, without substance.
I'm saying that VR is just a other meaningless, more advanced entertainment system.
AGI_69 t1_j516ntf wrote
>VR is just a other meaningless, more advanced entertainment system
It's just lack of imagination to say, that all possible VR's are meaningless.
As I've said, we probably live in simulation right now, and I would say it's not the only meaningful simulation possible.
OldWorldRevival t1_j5174df wrote
Did you read what I said about living in a simulation in my OP?
AGI_69 t1_j518khe wrote
>Sort of an aside, but I wanted to get ahead of the "we could live in the
matrix already" people as if I haven't deeply probed that question...
heh.
You didn't really address the argument. I am sorry, but you can't remove arguments, by simply mentioning them.
Nothing in laws of physics says, that this "reality" cannot be fully simulated at human perception resolution. Why can't there be large scale simulations with billions of people and be meaningful ? To me, I think there is lack of imagination in saying "All possible VR's are not meaningful"
gantork t1_j519krg wrote
You might think entertainment is meaningless but that's not the case for everyone.
If in the future I can go explore Pandora in full dive VR, live there for a while and enjoy the beautiful environments from the movies as if they were real, that would no doubt be a meaningful or even transcendental experience for me, probably something I'd remember the rest of my life.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments