5 ms·
3 possibilities: - We are not living in a simulation. - We are living in a simulation, but it is a "perfect" simulation. There is no way to determine if we ar
by rland 7y ago
3 possibilities:
- We are not living in a simulation.
- We are living in a simulation, but it is a "perfect" simulation. There is no way to determine if we are in a simulation from within the simluation.
- We are living in a simulation, and it is not perfect. It could be exploited from within itself.
By far the most likely is 1 or 2, based on what we've observed, imho.
- paulsutter 7y agoWhile 3 is unlikely, thanks for posting it. It’s the first reason I’ve ever heard that the simulation question could matter at all. As a person who prefers high-variance outcomes, that could be cool
- thecupisblue 7y agoThen follow the white rabbit and look around, there are many exploits. Your consciousness influences wave collapse (with a weight tho), that's a huge attack vector. Von Neumann had a good theory on this one.
- mpoteat 7y agoWhen was the last time you wrote perfect software? Personally never in my case. The possibility of complex, provably correct software is pretty unlikely I think due to fundamental logical reasons. I think any ancestor researcher would have at least some bugs in their code.
- bena 7y agoLike one that prevents us from being able to write perfect code?
- bitL 7y ago3 explains magic, i.e. a hack from within the simulation to call some undocumented service of a simulation hypervisor. Well, maybe even 2 if it was intentional to have a hidden API, callable from inside (what if the author wants to spawn an avatar and play inside while granting themselves god mode?).
- mar77i 7y agoDo you also get that sci-fi arch with a portal and some computer controls in your room if you say "Arch" out loud?