Re: Sim Theory

[Zenaan Harkness]

Brings a smile, xorcist :)

"The great unknowable" experiencing itself, through itself, by
 imposing arbitrary restrictions upon spliters of itself."

Which conception gives rise to a fundamental existential question:

"To what extent am I puppeteered/ pre-ordained, and to what extent
 (if at all) am I able to exercise 'free will'?"



On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 03:02:34AM -, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote:
> Too cerebral.
> 
> It's interesting to me that the simulation hypothesis has so much in
> common with Buddhist philosophy. In fact, Buddhism already answers this
> sort of thing.
> 
> Alan Watts, as a Zen Buddhist, presented the view that life is essentially
> a game played out at the cosmic level. All life is essentially the
> ultimate
> source of consciousness, God, the Atman.. whatever you want to call it.
> God desired to experience life as Alan Watts, and Richard Nixon, and dogs,
> and lions and gazelle in order to expand its experience, its awareness, of
> itself.
> 
> Put another way, intelligent life is the part of the universe that
> endeavors to understand itself. We're the Universe's subconscious. We are
> the dreams of the ultimate mind.
> 
> So, the equivalent Buddhist question would be - why would an incredibly
> advanced mind dream of us? Well, the answer to that is why do you dream
> the things you dream? It's a statement of desire, or of dread - because
> fundamentally life is a bit boring, and its much better if you're banging
> supermodels or running from zombies. So those things come up in dreams.
> Likewise, its incredibly boring being God. Imagine it. Never being
> surprised, needing nothing, all goals can be met without the slightest
> effort, and so on. It would be an incredible drag.
> 
> Casting this notion into the framework of a simulation, one might say that
> this advanced civilization is simply bored. Imagine Star-Trek type
> technology, where you just hit a button and get a perfect steak. The SAME
> steak, every time. There is no need to cook, because you'll never beat the
> machine, and yet in the end.. it all ends up tasting plastic.
> 
> Even with our meager technology, a great many people enjoy "roughing it"
> in the woods, camping and going low-tech. They enjoy getting away from TVs
> and phones and nonsense, and getting back to a more basic existence.
> 
> No need for existential crisis. Just a desire for life to be flavorful.
> 
> > So many people have proposed we're simulated...
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis
> >
> > Now why would such an extremely advanced civilization / collective
> > want to simulate us? Is this an unanswered question?
> >
> > Certainly they have long since
> > - solved biology, live forever, down/up load their brains against trauma
> > - solved life and mobility throughout their universe
> > - lost and forgotten their prehistory
> > - etc
> >
> > They could sim anything they want. So why sim us?
> >
> > Because something happened to them, something very big, something
> > serious and existentially threatening. And now they're *desperately*
> > trying to learn about death, life, humanity, the individual... something
> > they lost but is still encoded in them just enough to let them think of
> > making the sim...
> >
> 

Re: Sim Theory

[ben0wNed]

4 real saw that name on hacker m0dUle -



 Original Message 
On Oct 7, 2016, 3:01 PM, John Newman wrote:


R u the famous "rooty tooty fresh and fruity" ??


John

On Oct 7, 2016, at 5:46 PM, rooty < arpsp...@protonmail.com> wrote:


r u the famous mEtaSploit hacker script righter - ge0rgi



 Original Message 
On Oct 7, 2016, 11:15 AM, Georgi Guninski wrote:
On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 12:49:35PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
> Many believe that we live in a computer simulation. But it takes a
> billionaire and his money to ask scientists to help break us out of
> the simulation. ...

lol, so billionaires are asking to root the virtual machine, get root on
the host OS and possibly own the operator too? (this scales) lol

Re: Sim Theory

[John Newman]

R u the famous "rooty tooty fresh and fruity" ??


John

> On Oct 7, 2016, at 5:46 PM, rooty  wrote:
> 
> r u the famous mEtaSploit hacker script righter - ge0rgi
> 
> 
> 
>  Original Message 
> On Oct 7, 2016, 11:15 AM, Georgi Guninski wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 12:49:35PM -0400, grarpamp wrote: 
> > Many believe that we live in a computer simulation. But it takes a 
> > billionaire and his money to ask scientists to help break us out of 
> > the simulation. ... 
> 
> lol, so billionaires are asking to root the virtual machine, get root on 
> the host OS and possibly own the operator too? (this scales) lol 

Re: Sim Theory

[xorcist]

>
> I figure it's best to ignore the implications of the simulation
> hypothesis. There's nothing to be done about it.

If I'm understanding you correctly, I find I quite agree, but for perhaps
different reasons, because I don't find the implications to be all that
difficult.

Whether reality is material and we're threatened by cosmic rays, meteors,
or the vagaries of war-mongering, hairless apes with nukes, or whether
reality is immaterial, and we're at the mercy of a simulation, or some
unknowable God, the result is fundamentally the same when you follow it
out: There is no safe place in the universe. There is nothing to grab hold
of. The more we look for safety, the more danger we will find. The more we
try to grab hold of things, the more they will slip away. Death will
overtake every living thing, eventually.

And so, from this, it doesn't matter the slightest to me if reality is a
simulation, or not. For that matter, it doesn't matter in the slightest if
a meteor hits. Or if humanity blows itself up with nukes. I'd prefer my
other humans decided to play better games than Monopoly, Scrabble, or
Chess,
but it doesn't really matter one way or the other.

We're HERE. NOW - attending a party with some 7 billion or so other
people. So, party, and try to make it a FUN party.

Re: Sim Theory

[John Newman]

> On Oct 7, 2016, at 2:15 PM, Georgi Guninski  wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 12:49:35PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
>> Many believe that we live in a computer simulation. But it takes a
>> billionaire and his money to ask scientists to help break us out of
>> the simulation. ...
> 
> lol, so billionaires are asking to root the virtual machine, get root on
> the host OS and possibly own the operator too? (this scales) lol

And then what ?  It's not like there is any chance we would actually be 
breaking out of the sim into earth prime... if we are in a sim, it's sims all 
the way down

I figure it's best to ignore the implications of the simulation hypothesis. 
There's nothing to be done about it.


John 

Re: Sim Theory

[Georgi Guninski]

On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 12:49:35PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
> Many believe that we live in a computer simulation. But it takes a
> billionaire and his money to ask scientists to help break us out of
> the simulation. ...

lol, so billionaires are asking to root the virtual machine, get root on
the host OS and possibly own the operator too? (this scales) lol

Sim Theory

[grarpamp]

https://science.slashdot.org/story/16/10/06/1352205/tech-billionaires-are-asking-scientists-for-help-to-break-humans-out-of-computer-simulation
http://www.businessinsider.com/tech-billionaires-want-to-break-humans-out-of-a-computer-simulation-2016-10
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/10/sam-altmans-manifest-destiny
https://games.slashdot.org/story/16/06/03/0049258/elon-musk-one-in-billions-chance-were-not-living-in-a-computer-simulation

Tech Billionaires Are Asking Scientists For Help To Break Humans Out
of Computer Simulation

Many believe that we live in a computer simulation. But it takes a
billionaire and his money to ask scientists to help break us out of
the simulation. The New Yorker recently did a profile about Y
Combinator's Sam Altman. In the story, Altman discusses his theories
about being controlled by technology and delves into the simulation
theory. From an article on The New Yorker: Many people in Silicon
Valley have become obsessed with the simulation hypothesis, the
argument that what we experience as reality is in fact fabricated in a
computer; two tech billionaires have gone so far as to secretly engage
scientists to work on breaking us out of the simulation. Business
Insider adds: The piece doesn't give any clue as to who those two
billionaires are -- although it's easy to hazard a few guesses at who
they might be, like Musk himself or Altman's friend Peter Thiel -- but
it's fascinating to see how seriously people are taking this theory.
According to Musk, it's the most popular topic of conversation right
now.Earlier this year, at Code Conference, Elon Musk said there's "one
in billions" chance we're not living in a computer simulation.

Re: Sim Theory

[Mirimir]

On 09/22/2016 06:23 AM, John Newman wrote:
> 
>> On Sep 22, 2016, at 12:34 AM, Mirimir  wrote:
>> 'Quantum Thief' opens with prisoner's dilemma selection. Make numerous
>> digital copies, select for copies that cooperate, repeat.
>>
>> "As always, before the warmind and I shoot each other, I try to make
>> smalltalk."
> 
> 
> I just grabbed a torrent of the trilogy
> (waiting on the paperbacks I ordered). Phoa! 
> Cool fucking book, Im only about 50 pages
> into the Quantum Thief but the world building
> is fucking great I loved when Jean said he
> needed "root of this body!" to stop their
> escape ship getting destroyed.

Well, they're under attack by Archon-rootkit nanomissiles!

"I am root, and the body is a world-tree, an Yggdrasil. There are
diamond machines in its bones, proteonomic tech in its cells. And the
brain, a true Sobornost raion-scale brain, able to run whole worlds."

He throws many new words at readers, defined only in context. But they
all make sense, if you've read Stephenson, Stross, etc. Raions are
planet-scale computer clusters that Sobornost have created for running
their sims.

> Seems like will be great read. 
> 
> thx ;)
> 
> 
> John
> 
> 

Re: In solidarity with Library Genesis and Sci-Hub [was: Sim Theory]

[Cecilia Tanaka]

I think this message will make you smile.  Received it today.  :)

Muuaaah!  Kisses!  :*

Ceci

=

"Three years after Aaron Schwartz's tragic death, the fight for free access
to knowledge is far from over. Following Schwartz’s path, Alexandra
Elbakyan , a graduate
student from Kazakhstan, has been making the headlines since 2011, when she
founded Sci-Hub  (at the age of 22). In the vein of
what *ARG*  has been doing since 2000, “the
website provide mass and public access to research papers”"

Find here <
http://networkcultures.org/moneylab/2016/09/22/liberating-academic-papers-from-behind-their-paywalls/>
the MoneyLab latest blog post: "Liberating Academic Papers from Behind
their Paywalls".

--*Leila Ueberschlag | Intern MoneyLab#3* Institute of Network Cultures
Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences | HvA MoneyLab <
http://networkcultures.org/moneylab/> | 1&2 Dec 2016 | Pakhuis de Zwijger,
Amsterdam www.networkcultures.org @INCAmsterdam <
https://twitter.com/INCAmsterdam>

Re: Sim Theory

[Georgi Guninski]

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 03:15:40PM -0400, Steve Kinney wrote:
> None of this can or should persuade anyone but me that something
> damned strange is going on with this "reality" thing.  But I was and
> remain so persuaded.  Now the question is, what does it mean and what
> can I do with/to/about it?  So far the only answer I get is "just be
> aware that you don't know what you think you know about how reality
> works."  And worse - maybe Phil Dick was right.
>

Apologies for the offtopic noise, but this thread remotely reminds me of
the old joke:

Two unborn twins talk just before Birth:
-- Is there life after Birth?
-- Very unlikely. Nobody ever came back.

Re: In solidarity with Library Genesis and Sci-Hub [was: Sim Theory]

[Mirimir]

On 09/21/2016 12:26 PM, John Newman wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 01:07:10PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 6:15 AM, John Newman  wrote:
>> For this small price of love, you could grant it it's freedom,
>> for everyone, forever...
>>
>> http://custodians.online/
> 
> I don't have the apparatus to scan it - and I'm not sure a used
> copy in "very  good" condition would make a decent digital 
> copy :P 
> 
> Also, sci-hub.io seems to be down. 

Try sci-hub.cc :)

> John 
> 

Re: Sim Theory

[Steve Kinney]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1



On 09/21/2016 10:36 AM, John Newman wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 02:04:25PM +0300, Georgi Guninski wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 03:33:24PM -0400, John wrote:

>> For me a plausible counter example appears a late Bulgarian 
>> phenomenon Baba Vanga ( ??), who allegedly could
>> predict future with high accuracy and see in the past. She
>> survived practicing in times of advanced socialism, not telling
>> ill people they will die soon. I can't figure out how this
>> doesn't break causality, neither care.
>> 
>> Call me a crazy nut for the above.
>> 
>> The wikipedia page about her, likely with a lot of
>> disinformation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baba_Vanga
> 
> Hmm... I am pretty (extremely) cynical about such things, but,
> really, who fucking knows There is no doubt the "standard
> model" changes, but I like to think these "advances" are based on
> slightly harder science than Baba Vanga :P

I tell people that anyone who has ever kept a dream journal for a
substantial length of time will learn that time is not what we think
it is.  In my case, I was rather shocked to find descriptions of
several people I had not /yet/ met in real life, and how we would
interact some months later.

On another occasion, I found a detailed description of events - the
date confirmed as correct per the a note that the moon was full - that
one week later neither I nor anyone else involved remembered, in a
regular journal.  Mind = blown.

None of this can or should persuade anyone but me that something
damned strange is going on with this "reality" thing.  But I was and
remain so persuaded.  Now the question is, what does it mean and what
can I do with/to/about it?  So far the only answer I get is "just be
aware that you don't know what you think you know about how reality
works."  And worse - maybe Phil Dick was right.

:o/


-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJX4txcAAoJEECU6c5XzmuqMDAH/jxReYDZO5JssTmINwrcnhUE
JXfpJ7lBcn2wVP8Lz5i3LA2QS6R07uD/7oDvCWTZDfePc8qyOuYuvUgOsaVoXMEK
RUJsayFbVCyzQG7dS0kdalTlinfo5fxZp4ZS0X18je+Rrq/YPQ/M1zANDkqg8UV9
9vWZzCzEWnIEQjcH94yx+fYgeBdzddialfAxaxWovM0sKh7vXUmw/eFpNrSBKaIg
ZtA5231xvAowc2gi0D9goF4hvbBL6mAk6lObumSSpjA8OouIsnzYT4v2yXIQWYdj
2R6LjeuVZ5WceD7HuhmE//rcG7nBrzbyem+twZY4F3rJvX2HUo0xV54HZjfRZ/o=
=kx2c
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: In solidarity with Library Genesis and Sci-Hub [was: Sim Theory]

[John Newman]

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 01:07:10PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 6:15 AM, John Newman  wrote:
> For this small price of love, you could grant it it's freedom,
> for everyone, forever...
> 
> http://custodians.online/

I don't have the apparatus to scan it - and I'm not sure a used
copy in "very  good" condition would make a decent digital 
copy :P 

Also, sci-hub.io seems to be down. 


John 

Re: Sim Theory

[John Newman]

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 02:04:25PM +0300, Georgi Guninski wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 03:33:24PM -0400, John wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA512
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On September 18, 2016 8:36:52 AM EDT, Georgi Guninski 
> >  wrote:
> > >The main problem is this scales upwards till infinity via arguments of
> > >the form "who simulates the simulator?" and "who made what was before
> > >the big bang?".
> > 
> > It's turtles all the way down Actually, I like to think
> > that the universe is infinite and forever, except current
> > models predict heat death once entropy is reached in
> > some enormous amount of time...
> > 
> > But who fucking knows, really?
> >
> 
> Didn't Terry Pratchett claim in Disc World that the world is run on
> top of giant turtle? And depicted the big bang as "In the beginning 
> there was nothing, and it exploded"?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down


> 
> As for the "standard model" of "real reality", it changes often.
> 
> For me a plausible counter example appears a late Bulgarian
> phenomenon Baba Vanga ( ??), who allegedly could predict
> future with high accuracy and see in the past. She survived 
> practicing in times of advanced socialism, not telling ill people 
> they will die soon. 
> I can't figure out how this doesn't break causality, neither care.
> 
> Call me a crazy nut for the above.
> 
> The wikipedia page about her, likely with a lot of disinformation:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baba_Vanga

Hmm... I am pretty (extremely) cynical about such things, but, really,
who fucking knows There is no doubt the "standard model" changes, 
but I like to think these "advances" are based on slightly harder
science than Baba Vanga :P  


John 


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Sim Theory

[Georgi Guninski]

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 03:33:24PM -0400, John wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
> 
> 
> 
> On September 18, 2016 8:36:52 AM EDT, Georgi Guninski  
> wrote:
> >The main problem is this scales upwards till infinity via arguments of
> >the form "who simulates the simulator?" and "who made what was before
> >the big bang?".
> 
> It's turtles all the way down Actually, I like to think
> that the universe is infinite and forever, except current
> models predict heat death once entropy is reached in
> some enormous amount of time...
> 
> But who fucking knows, really?
>

Didn't Terry Pratchett claim in Disc World that the world is run on
top of giant turtle? And depicted the big bang as "In the beginning 
there was nothing, and it exploded"?

As for the "standard model" of "real reality", it changes often.

For me a plausible counter example appears a late Bulgarian
phenomenon Baba Vanga (Баба Ванга), who allegedly could predict
future with high accuracy and see in the past. She survived 
practicing in times of advanced socialism, not telling ill people 
they will die soon. 
I can't figure out how this doesn't break causality, neither care.

Call me a crazy nut for the above.

The wikipedia page about her, likely with a lot of disinformation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baba_Vanga

Re: Sim Theory

[John Newman]

> On Sep 20, 2016, at 11:39 PM, Mirimir  wrote:
> 
>> On 09/20/2016 09:22 PM, Tom wrote:
>> btw, I'd suggest reading Phil Plaits 'Death from the Skies!'. In this
>> book he examines a couple of scenarios how the universe might end (among
>> a couple other ways how we could die). Very fun read.
> 
> There's The Killing Star by Charles R. Pellegrino and George Zebrowski.
> Death by relativistic bombardment.
> 

I was trying to get a copy of this book a
while back but it's out of print and used
prices were high (like $30) I don't 
suppose anyone has an ePub they could
shoot me?  Or is it worth $30 for a 1995
paperback, maybe so...

BTW Mirmir I've read and enjoyed Accelerando
and Diaspora... I'll have to check out the
Jean le Flambeur stuff

John


> https://www.reddit.com/r/Frisson/comments/1j08oq/text_excerpt_from_the_killing_star_by_charles/
> 
>>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 06:07:56PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
 On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 3:48 PM,   wrote:
 I find it difficult to believe in the heat death of the universe. The Big
 Crunch makes sense to me. The universe expands for a time, and collapses.
 Like breathing.
 But continual expansion with the universe turning into some cold,
 undefinable soup.
>>> 
>>> Current model really fucking cold heat death will occur. Yet if gravity
>>> is true, yes, no matter infintismal amount, you cannot blow past to
>>> escape it. Thus collapse, or at least steady state in case of repulse
>>> forces, is the required result.
>>> 
>>> It is sad that not even sci fi knows how to harvest from forcibly
>>> diminishing Kelvin, as to revert requires similar energy. But we
>>> will have fun till then, provided we get beyond Sol or the galaxy.
>> 

Re: Sim Theory

[Mirimir]

On 09/20/2016 09:22 PM, Tom wrote:
> btw, I'd suggest reading Phil Plaits 'Death from the Skies!'. In this
> book he examines a couple of scenarios how the universe might end (among
> a couple other ways how we could die). Very fun read.

There's The Killing Star by Charles R. Pellegrino and George Zebrowski.
Death by relativistic bombardment.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Frisson/comments/1j08oq/text_excerpt_from_the_killing_star_by_charles/

> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 06:07:56PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 3:48 PM,   wrote:
>>> I find it difficult to believe in the heat death of the universe. The Big
>>> Crunch makes sense to me. The universe expands for a time, and collapses.
>>> Like breathing.
>>> But continual expansion with the universe turning into some cold,
>>> undefinable soup.
>>
>> Current model really fucking cold heat death will occur. Yet if gravity
>> is true, yes, no matter infintismal amount, you cannot blow past to
>> escape it. Thus collapse, or at least steady state in case of repulse
>> forces, is the required result.
>>
>> It is sad that not even sci fi knows how to harvest from forcibly
>> diminishing Kelvin, as to revert requires similar energy. But we
>> will have fun till then, provided we get beyond Sol or the galaxy.
> 

Re: Sim Theory

[Mirimir]

On 09/17/2016 08:09 PM, grarpamp wrote:
> So many people have proposed we're simulated...
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis
> 
> Now why would such an extremely advanced civilization / collective
> want to simulate us? Is this an unanswered question?

Maybe they're so advanced that there's no way to express their reasons
(or whatever) in ways we could comprehend ;)

But, stuff comes to mind:

Diaspora by Greg Egan [1998]
http://www.gregegan.net/DIASPORA/DIASPORA.html

Accelerando, by Charles Stross [2005]
http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/fiction/accelerando/accelerando-intro.html

Jean le Flambeur trilogy, by Hannu Rajaniemi [2010-2014]
https://www.goodreads.com/series/57134-jean-le-flambeur

Re: Sim Theory

[grarpamp]

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 3:48 PM,   wrote:
> I find it difficult to believe in the heat death of the universe. The Big
> Crunch makes sense to me. The universe expands for a time, and collapses.
> Like breathing.
> But continual expansion with the universe turning into some cold,
> undefinable soup.

Current model really fucking cold heat death will occur. Yet if gravity
is true, yes, no matter infintismal amount, you cannot blow past to
escape it. Thus collapse, or at least steady state in case of repulse
forces, is the required result.

It is sad that not even sci fi knows how to harvest from forcibly
diminishing Kelvin, as to revert requires similar energy. But we
will have fun till then, provided we get beyond Sol or the galaxy.

Re: Sim Theory

[John]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512



On September 18, 2016 8:36:52 AM EDT, Georgi Guninski  
wrote:
>The main problem is this scales upwards till infinity via arguments of
>the form "who simulates the simulator?" and "who made what was before
>the big bang?".

It's turtles all the way down Actually, I like to think
that the universe is infinite and forever, except current
models predict heat death once entropy is reached in
some enormous amount of time...

But who fucking knows, really?

John

- --
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

iQFBBAEBCgArJBxrZXliYXNlLmlvL25peGVuIDxuaXhlbkBrZXliYXNlLmlvPgUC
V+GO+QAKCRDjJCC+1Hp4x9+rCADEP4G7gKjtKDUwk9AwjpWiawl9DTqxM7LXvRNg
VVm0w1eJ6a5rb+JEqJO3j/BvnJRtehUfoAAnO2Ir+oF4HZ3IzU2VCcEbpQ85PE69
3RKSKKrpfl4L0ejMY0hcnLPZy1LO8nfa7kmZTDcfPf4vVsGRknDh7CEnbJDwDc5u
nljdgCYabyU2sD82JkbeKWtEV6lx/mEOQIf1ETce1a8WtkFiNnXOvAIh+0Bn+z9S
qxtt/8fLDB88anEXphIRD4KaxfcDFX6W0vKpss6bu+NDLnxC8lKfU06N4Nce2wJs
JRcLdAgMmyjVZ1tKYQCrO0aVRYVUSgFIyM7Am5+a5ZD8pgdc
=l6uD
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Sim Theory

[Georgi Guninski]

On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 10:09:30PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
> So many people have proposed we're simulated...
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis
> 
> Now why would such an extremely advanced civilization / collective
> want to simulate us? Is this an unanswered question?
>

I think the problem is open, unless the simulators answer it.
The main problem is this scales upwards till infinity via arguments of
the form "who simulates the simulator?" and "who made what was before
the big bang?".
Also, there is no sound axiomatic system for physics and other empirical
stuff, it changes often on large scale.
 

Sim Theory

[cpunc]

appendeges > appendages

intelegent > intelligent

apendage   > appendage

I guess spelling is subjective.

--

cpunc

Sim Theory

[Magilla]

> xorcist:
> intelligent life is the part of the universe that endeavors to
understand itself.
> We're the Universe's subconscious.

You are a part of a super organism that is stretching through time in the
form of every generation of everything that has ever lived; a being that
has an infinite number of appendeges that represent all living forms of
life on Earth.

Every living thing is the very end of an interdimensional super intelegent
apendage, like organic virtual reality goggles.

Re: Sim Theory

[xorcist]

Too cerebral.

It's interesting to me that the simulation hypothesis has so much in
common with Buddhist philosophy. In fact, Buddhism already answers this
sort of thing.

Alan Watts, as a Zen Buddhist, presented the view that life is essentially
a game played out at the cosmic level. All life is essentially the
ultimate
source of consciousness, God, the Atman.. whatever you want to call it.
God desired to experience life as Alan Watts, and Richard Nixon, and dogs,
and lions and gazelle in order to expand its experience, its awareness, of
itself.

Put another way, intelligent life is the part of the universe that
endeavors to understand itself. We're the Universe's subconscious. We are
the dreams of the ultimate mind.

So, the equivalent Buddhist question would be - why would an incredibly
advanced mind dream of us? Well, the answer to that is why do you dream
the things you dream? It's a statement of desire, or of dread - because
fundamentally life is a bit boring, and its much better if you're banging
supermodels or running from zombies. So those things come up in dreams.
Likewise, its incredibly boring being God. Imagine it. Never being
surprised, needing nothing, all goals can be met without the slightest
effort, and so on. It would be an incredible drag.

Casting this notion into the framework of a simulation, one might say that
this advanced civilization is simply bored. Imagine Star-Trek type
technology, where you just hit a button and get a perfect steak. The SAME
steak, every time. There is no need to cook, because you'll never beat the
machine, and yet in the end.. it all ends up tasting plastic.

Even with our meager technology, a great many people enjoy "roughing it"
in the woods, camping and going low-tech. They enjoy getting away from TVs
and phones and nonsense, and getting back to a more basic existence.

No need for existential crisis. Just a desire for life to be flavorful.

> So many people have proposed we're simulated...
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis
>
> Now why would such an extremely advanced civilization / collective
> want to simulate us? Is this an unanswered question?
>
> Certainly they have long since
> - solved biology, live forever, down/up load their brains against trauma
> - solved life and mobility throughout their universe
> - lost and forgotten their prehistory
> - etc
>
> They could sim anything they want. So why sim us?
>
> Because something happened to them, something very big, something
> serious and existentially threatening. And now they're *desperately*
> trying to learn about death, life, humanity, the individual... something
> they lost but is still encoded in them just enough to let them think of
> making the sim...
>

Sim Theory

[grarpamp]

So many people have proposed we're simulated...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis

Now why would such an extremely advanced civilization / collective
want to simulate us? Is this an unanswered question?

Certainly they have long since
- solved biology, live forever, down/up load their brains against trauma
- solved life and mobility throughout their universe
- lost and forgotten their prehistory
- etc

They could sim anything they want. So why sim us?

Because something happened to them, something very big, something
serious and existentially threatening. And now they're *desperately*
trying to learn about death, life, humanity, the individual... something
they lost but is still encoded in them just enough to let them think of
making the sim...