Nick Bostrom wrote:

>>Hal Finney: Perhaps you are considering posthumans who simulate variations 
>>on possible histories?  In that case only those simulations which happen
>>to match the past exactly would give rise to this question, which is 
>>arguably a small fraction of simulations assuming imperfect knowledge 
>>of the past.
>I think a version of your worry would pertain in this case too - one could 
>ask whether there is a fact of the matter whether my current 
>observer-moment is simulated or material. And the answer would be the same, 
>that the hypothesis considered refers indexically to its token 

But a notion like "token implementation" would lead (with the comp
hyp) toward Jacques Mallah unsolved implementation problem.
I don't think there is a meaning in such an expression. Token are just 
relatively to an infinite set of abstract indistinguishable observers.
See also my post to Brett Hall. 


Reply via email to