I find your response valuable. Thank you. Two points: 1) On simulation. The common notion of simulation is vested in being in "safemode" training for the "safetychallenged" reality yet to come. We get born, we do stuff, we die. Which reality are we then preparing for?
Having said that, I'm not against examining the possibility of a special kind of simulation, one we have not quite managed to find the correct words and description for. Bearing in mind, that all we'd be doing by becoming AGI was to simulate our characteristic selves as a generalized species with intelligence. Perhaps, there's a secret switch somewhere, a mode switch? 2) You stated: "This" is a local perspective within a conscio-presence in model/conceptual topology of physical energy flow and an existent duality instance expression. That is a very-long expression of complexity, but I get it. It contains some very-interesting ideas. And yes, in one state of AGI, it could be that, which you stated. However, the idea of "this" is not duality restricted. It's not dimensionally restricted. As atoms do under varying conditions, "this" is restricted by the reality of its application, its effective complexity, its state of relativist existence. The graphic and video, as possible models of "this", represent an instance of effective complexity. They might be 2 versions of a very-similar thing. The one theoretical (a graphical depiction), the other an actual recording of a phenomenal sample. Suppose then we could succeed to progress our AGI to that level of understanding, to replicate "this" in a machine? Would we be able to achieve that without quantum computing? Probably not. My concerns for the development of us, as AGI, rests in that soon there would be a great, technological divide between those who could ever gain access to the development (and control) of AGI. Quantum computing is the game changer. At best, we the brave - as researchers, grokkers and passionate hobbyists - would be able to have some understanding of the approaching technology. We could carry on for years discussing how it works, or not. We would probably have no direct impact on it though. In reality, simulations aside, AGI would have no further need for us anymore, not unless we become it to the maximum of our human ability. ________________________________ From: John Rose <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, 06 March 2021 14:27 To: AGI <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [agi] Patterns of Cognition On Friday, March 05, 2021, at 4:28 PM, Nanograte Knowledge Technologies wrote: How should we describe "this" with a model? IMO everything is virtualized, a simulation. We, human life form agents host the simulation started eons ago. Base reality is the only K-complexity which doesn't exist, all local K-complexities are based on models/perspectives and that's how it's defined. Nothing is perfectly isolable in this Universe (I assume, I’m not a physicist). "This" is a local perspective within a conscio-presence in model/conceptual topology of physical energy flow and an existent duality instance expression. When you say "one must first become AGI" I look at it as hosting an AGI model within my own cerebral OS. My AGI model has become sort of a parasitic twin :) But I can ask it questions and get answers efficiently now which may sound strange to some… Please Matt Mahoney don’t troll me bruh 😊 Artificial General Intelligence List<https://agi.topicbox.com/latest> / AGI / see discussions<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi> + participants<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/members> + delivery options<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription> Permalink<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Ta5ed5d0d0e4de96d-Me4d986fc93cd9f85f4c85c54> ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Ta5ed5d0d0e4de96d-M9c4c435b1ae309f08bd3e47f Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
