The article about Slack is really good, thanks for linking.
This is a pretty daunting takedown of the whole concept of political campaigning. It is pretty hilarious when you consider how much money, how much human toil, has been squandered in this manner.
“Or is it so obvious no one bothers to talk about it?”
Well, that’s not it.
Humans are ‘them’? Who are you actually trying to threaten here?
Certainly, self replicating robots will affect our survival. I’m not sure it will go in the way we want though.
The Second Machine Age -- > https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-second-machine-age-erik-brynjolfsson/1115780364
They are good training tasks.
I dunno, it might well be infinite. If God makes your life happen again, then it presumably includes his appearance at the end. Ergo you make the same choice and so on.
Seems like you pick relive. Doesn’t gain you anything, but maybe the horse will learn to sing.
I’m not sure what you mean by ‘it is a metaphysical issue’, and I’m getting kind of despairing at breaking through here, but one more time.
Just to be clear, every sim who says ‘real’ in this example is wrong, yeah? They have been deceived by the partial information they are being given, and the answer they give does not accurately represent reality. The ‘right’ call for the sims is that they are sims.
In a future like you are positing, if our universe is analogous to a sim, the ‘right’ call is that we are a sim. If, unfortunately, our designers decide to mislead us into guessing wrong by giving us numbers instead of just telling us which we are...that still wouldn’t make us real.
This is my last on the subject, but I hope you get it at this point.
So, like, a thing we generally do in these kinds of deals is ignore trivial cases, yeah? Like, if we were talking about the trolley problem, no one brings up the possibility that you are too weak to pull the lever, or posits telepathy in a prisoner’s dilemma.
To simplify everything, let’s stick with your first example. We (thousand foks) make one sim. We tell him that there are a thousand and one humans in existence, one of which is a sim, the others are real. We ask him to guess. He guesses real. We delete him and do this again and again, millions of time. Every sim guesses real. Everyone is wrong.
This isn’t an example that proves that, if we are using our experience as analogous to the sim, we should guess ‘real’. It isn’t a future that presents an argument against the simulation argument. It is just a weird special case of a universe where most things are sims.
The fact that there are more ‘real’ at any given time isn’t relevant to the fact of whether any of these mayfly sims are, themselves, real. If there are more simulated universes, then it is more likely that our universe is simulated.
I’m confused by why you are constraining the argument to future-humanity as simulators, and further by why you are care what order the experimenters turn em on.
Like, it seems perverse to make up an example where we turn on one sim at a time, a trillion trillion times in a row. Yeah, each one is gonna get told that there are 6 billion real humans and one sim, so if they guess real or sim they might get tricked to guess real. Who cares? No reason to think that’s our future.
The iv disjunct you are posing isn’t one that we don’t have familiarity with. How many instances of Mario Kart did we spin up? How bout Warcraft? The idea that our future versions are gonna be super careful with sims isn’t super interesting. Sentience will increase forever, resources will increase forever, eventually someone is gonna press the button.
Oh, yeah, I see what you are saying. Having 2 1⁄4 chances is, what, 7⁄16 of escape, so the coin does make it worse.
Coin doesn’t help. Say I decide to pick 2 if it is heads, 1 if it is tails.
I’ve lowered my odds of escaping on try 1 to 1⁄4, which initially looks good, but the overall chance stays the same, since I get another 1⁄4 on the second round. If I do 2 flips, and use the 4 spread there to get 1, 2, 3, or 4, then I have an eight of a chance on each of rounds 1-4.
Similarly, if I raise the number of outcomes that point to one number, that round’s chance goes up , but the others decline, so my overall chance stays pegged to 1⁄2. (ie, if HH, HT, TH all make me say 1, then I have a 3⁄8 chance that round, but only a 1⁄8 of being awake on round 2 and getting TT).
No. You will always say the same number each time, since you are identical each time.
As long as it isn’t that number, you are going another round. Eventually it gets to that number, whereupon you go free if you get the luck of the coin, or go back under if you miss it.
Sure, you can guess zero or negative numbers or whatever.
So you only get one choice, since you will make the same one every time. I guess for simplicity choose ‘first’, but any number has same chance.
Is it possible to pass information between awakenings? Use coin to scratch floor or something?