27
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2024
27 points (100.0% liked)
TechTakes
1432 readers
35 users here now
Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.
This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.
For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Presented without comment: this utter crankery about hacking the Matrix (HN)
Among the things they've already tried are torture, touching grass, and declining all cookies:
This idiocy has been patiently submitted 3 times before but finally broke containment
https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=theseedsofscience.org
There's a great sneer-novel about simulationists called If This Book Exists, You're in the Wrong Universe by Jason Pargin.
The villains of the story are a group of TESCREAL stand-ins who style themselves as the "Simmurai." They have the goal of breaking the "simulation" just the same as the authors of the (hilarious) paper you've shared. They have a very similar tone, which to my ears sounds like a serial killer winding themselves up to do the deed. The big twist is that the Simmurai have been unwittingly suborned by a Lovecraftian horror that has bent their plan to its own ends. The only thing standing in their way is a small group of working class millenials from Ohio, who get tangled up in the story because they once shot up some space drugs in a Denny's parking lot and can therefore see the true nature of the universe (maybe).
Time to create a big mindfuck for the Rationalists. First have an active account on EA/LW and actively participate. Post this research as a talking point. Then leave one message 'lol just to be sure: I no longer consent to being in a simulation'. And then never touch that account + any related accounts ever again.
Of course one of the first things they try is torture, because "maybe the simulationists aren't as big of bastards as we are" is a reasonable hypothesis to test and not a reason to be locked up.
Also since we're messing with absurd thought experiments, I'd like to propose that when they declined consent the simulationists could actually just disable the part of that agent with a subjective personal experience, making them a P-zombie in the David Chalmers tradition. As such, they were no longer part of the simulation without adversely affecting any other aspect of it.
Is this stupid? Obviously, but let's be honest: it's probably less stupid than at least half of the actual paper.
In another episode of "anyone can upload a PDF and call it a paper mate, they don't even check"...
What the hell is "Seeds of Science"? Is that some weird arxiv thingy that also gives you a logo at the top?
I wanted to sneer at this, but it very quickly outgrew a Stubsack comment, so, enjoy, this is what you made me do
https://awful.systems/post/2059051