6 ms·

How would you define a bug?

• vidarh 13y ago
  And how would you know about it? If we are in a simulation, then it is not a given that the simulation does not get "rolled back" and restarted from an earlier point regularly, or just ditched and started all over again if/when bugs are found, just like a researcher will empty and clean his petri dish when he notices contamination that'll ruin his research.
• UnfalseDesign 13y ago
  True. In order to know something is not running correctly, you would need a clear concept of what it would look like if it were running correctly. (The old argument that if you were raised in a cave in total darkness, you can't know it is dark unless you know what light is.) In order to notice a bug, we would need to be outside the simulation.
• stef25 13y ago
  Maybe we are the bug. A while back this guy discovered that his Quake bots that had been running for 4 years found the perfect strategy to survival, which was to stop fighting. In contrast, look at what humanity is doing. Assuming the purpose of life is not to self destruct then we most certainly have a bug in our system. Whoever wrote Quake wrote better code than "God".
  • telephonetemp 13y ago
    > A while back this guy discovered that his Quake bots that had been running for 4 years found the perfect strategy to survival, which was to stop fighting. That sounds fascinating but also a bit hard to believe. Can you give a link to that story?
    • whopa 13y ago
      You're right to be skeptical. It made the rounds last month, but it turned out to be a hoax: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/07/01/quake-3-arena-world-peace_n_3529082.html http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/07/01/quake-3-arena-wor...
    • tlarkworthy 13y ago
      ya, hoax http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/07/01/quake-3-arena-world-peace_n_3529082.html http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/07/01/quake-3-arena-wor... good story tho
    • deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]