3 ms·
It behooves them to be the kind of people that would be nice to the lower levels, since that is then all but certainly how the version of them one level up will
by nooneelse 16y ago
It behooves them to be the kind of people that would be nice to the lower levels, since that is then all but certainly how the version of them one level up will also behave in the same situation. It is a bit like Newcomb's problem, if you are predictably and cooperatively well-behaved you get rewarded.
- ajuc 16y agoDid you mean that they should be nice because the upper levels can see them and intervent? I can agree that in such situation they should be good to their simulated selves. Or did you mean that even when upper levels are not watching, their (upper levels) behaviour depends on decision of lower levels? Because I can't see why it is so. People at any given level are either: a) at the top and have nothing to worry - their universe won't stop working no matter what they do b) simulated and have no choice - what they decide is just result of simulation inputs and, maybe, tinkering of upper levels Ether way - the real decisions are made only at the top level - if not, why all simulated worlds have the same history? People would make different decisions earlier in simulated history if it was possible, and after many generations of simulated people and their different decisions worlds would diverge beyond recognition. Even if free will exists on lower levels - why decision of lower levels inhabitants should change probabilities of upper levels decisions? Either they have free will, and their decisions are independent of upper levels - or they don't have free will, and their decisions just mirrors their top level selves. Maybe I'm misunderstanding sth, English isn't my native language, and the subject is hard. Anyway - it's very interesting thought experiment.