3 ms·

I don't see how that follows.

• AnimalMuppet 8y ago
  If we're in a simulation, it must be running on a simulator. That simulator is presumably not just a natural feature of the universe - that's just "laws of nature deeper than we have discovered so far", which I take as something different from "simulator". In fact, the simulator (by my definitions) has to be an artificial construction - that is, created by an intelligence for a purpose. That doesn't necessarily get you intelligent design of life, but it does get you intelligent design of the universe. I, too, find it amusing that we've decided that God doesn't exist, that the natural universe is all that exists. And then some people decide that we're in a simulation, that the universe is an artificial construction created by someone outside of it (but who totally is not God). I'd find it even more amusing if I thought that the simulator people had a reasonable position. (To me, "you can't prove me wrong" does not imply "therefore I'm probably right".)
  • resource0x 8y ago
    Curiously, parallel to this thread, there's another one on HN, which discusses (the lack of) exceptions in golang. And the reasoning starts out with "we don't need exceptions", so we throw them out the door, but then, after a couple of intermediate steps, they come back through the window. Same door-window scenario is playing out here :)
  • logfromblammo 8y ago
    God wants you to set a breakpoint, read out some locals, and put a watch on one of them.