Are We Living In a Computer Simulation?

[anhinga_anhinga]

Cema pointed my attention to the fact that one of the smartest modern philosophers, Nick Bostrom, now has a separate Web site dedicated to the Simulation argument.

Comments

[cema.livejournal.com]

I will start from the end. The specs are good for a human being. When this human being can convince the computer to behave according to the specs, that's implementation. Therefore, if the computer is as intelligent as a human, there is no difference.

I do not see, however, why in order to implement the simulation one would need to come through the singularity. Furthermore, I do not see why coming through the singularity would necessarily lead to the simulation becoming possible.

Finally, a "correct theory of the world" is, strictly speaking, impossible, as follows from the trivial observation that, in order to simulate a universe, one would have to create its copy (another universe), which would be futile anyway, because no measurement would be possible (it would destroy the similarity between the universes). So, instead of a correct theory, we need something more flexible: a plausible theory. Now this is interesting, but I did not think sufficiently hard about this to post anything, even in a comment. (Maybe we will have time to discuss this tomorrow?)

[anhinga-anhinga.livejournal.com]

>I do not see, however, why in order to implement the simulation one would need to come through the singularity. Furthermore, I do not see why coming through the singularity would necessarily lead to the simulation becoming possible.

Mostly, because the simulation of this kind is AI.

>correct theory

I mean, a theory based on "correct" principles. Of course, we can only talk about "more correct" and "less correct", like in "general relativity is more correct than the preceding theory of gravity".

Basically, I don't think the existing understanding of the world is "correct enough" to tell us what is required to create an experience of a human-like life by running a computer program.

>a plausible theory [...] Maybe we will have time to discuss this tomorrow?

Indeed.