Taken from JRE #1350 w/Nick Bostrom: https://youtu.be/5c4cv7rVlE8
Video Source
48 Comments
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Taken from JRE #1350 w/Nick Bostrom: https://youtu.be/5c4cv7rVlE8
Video Source
You must be logged in to post a comment.
This argument collapses on itself. If this were a simulation, we couldn't use any evidence from "inside" to reason about what gave rise to the simulation. None of this is real. In the real world, there may be supercomputers that appear spontaneously. Or it may take impossible odds to construct one. You can't borrow from this reality to calculate probabilities that it isn't real.
It's strange to think that, if we assume that it is true, that we are all simulated; and we assume that it isn't a singular experience, that every one of us exists as individual, simulated brains, and not just one brain perceiving multiple people; and that the simulation started at the beginning of time as we know it, maybe to test whether evolution at such a scale was possible – then the simulation hypothesis would have always been correct, since the beginning of time, that's billions of years, and yet, until relatively recently, we could not even begin to fathom it, because we had no ideas about simulations or computers or artificial intelligence, it couldn't have even been a thought in our minds, and now it's entirely plausible because of the discovery of those things. So all the things we think currently about our creation that seem entirely implausible or completely unfathomable, that we assume we will never be able to understand, could be one discovery away from making perfect sense.
Computer chips are made from an element found in sand, sand has existed for billions of years, everything that makes up computer chips, and everything that makes up every piece of technology we've ever made, has existed since the beginning of time, it's just been a case of piecing things together in the right way. It's likely that all of the answers we are looking for are out there, we just have to piece them together.
Sounds like an extremely weak anthropic bias.
Rogan you mother f*** if this s*** was true you would be my f**** slave rubbing my feet rolling my joints packing my bowls loading up the DMT f**** bong growing my shrooms going out and getting b**** for me and Jamie would be f**** pretty much fired
I'm genuinely surprised how weak this guy's points are & his definitions themselves are especially for an "educated" mind.
Also, Joe seems to stay so solid in his stance not allowing himself to go down some of the rabbit holes being created here & instead he's easily, logically & consistently debated this subject admirably.