| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Uncle Clover" |
| Date: |
25 Feb 2007 02:53:37 PM |
| Object: |
Simulated reality - would you if you could? |
Suppose an individual emerged in the field of science who perfected the
mind/machine interface and could produce simulated realities to the exact
specifications of anyone who wishes to have one created for them. Life forms
could even evolve and grow in the simulation either exactly as they do here, or
in completely innovative and unprecedented ways.
Part of the manner in which the simulations would work would be that they'd run
on the minds of individuals actually connected to them. For technical reasons,
the feat would require those individuals to permanently abandon life in the
"real world" as all but their central nervous system are stripped away, their
living nerves and brain matter kept comfortably and healthfully alive in a
stream of liquid nutrients and waste-eliminating components.
You are offered a chance to be one of these initial individuals. You are
assured to your own satisfaction that once the reality you'll be helping to
simulate is up and running, anyone in the real world who wants to visit and
interact with you will be able to do so easily and without limit - even going so
far as to join you permanently if they wish, the experience feeling every bit as
real to all concerned as it ever could have felt in the real world.
Would you do it? I know I would.
--
L8r,
Uncle Clover
__________________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Every birth carries within
it the seed of its own
demise
__________________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Narrow minds
breed thick skulls.
__________________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Darkness is just light
that's traveling...
in a different direction...
than where you're looking.
__________________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Blog: "Family - The Binds That Tie"
http://bindsthattie.blogspot.com/
.
|
|
| User: "Smiler" |
|
| Title: Re: Simulated reality - would you if you could? |
25 Feb 2007 07:28:26 PM |
|
|
"Uncle Clover" <UncleClover@SpamMeNot.com> wrote in message
news:tks3u2p71s2556cue3et9hps48j9qq3nu1@4ax.com...
Suppose an individual emerged in the field of science who perfected the
mind/machine interface and could produce simulated realities to the exact
specifications of anyone who wishes to have one created for them. Life
forms
could even evolve and grow in the simulation either exactly as they do
here, or
in completely innovative and unprecedented ways.
Part of the manner in which the simulations would work would be that
they'd run
on the minds of individuals actually connected to them. For technical
reasons,
the feat would require those individuals to permanently abandon life in
the
"real world" as all but their central nervous system are stripped away,
their
living nerves and brain matter kept comfortably and healthfully alive in a
stream of liquid nutrients and waste-eliminating components.
You are offered a chance to be one of these initial individuals. You are
assured to your own satisfaction that once the reality you'll be helping
to
simulate is up and running, anyone in the real world who wants to visit
and
interact with you will be able to do so easily and without limit - even
going so
far as to join you permanently if they wish, the experience feeling every
bit as
real to all concerned as it ever could have felt in the real world.
Would you do it? I know I would.
1) Who controls the life support equipment?
2) What guarantees are there that the life support system will never break
down/malfunction/suffer a power out/be switched off?
3) Who controls the simulated reality?
4) What guarantees are there that the simulated reality would not/could not
be altered by someone.
The person that controlled these things would have power over your life and
death and even your thoughts and experiences.
An omnipotent living god?
At least it would be one that could be shown to exist :-)
Smiler,
The godless one
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Simulated reality - would you if you could? |
26 Feb 2007 09:20:54 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 01:28:26 GMT, "Smiler" <Smiler@Joe.King.com> wrote:
"Uncle Clover" <UncleClover@SpamMeNot.com> wrote in message
news:tks3u2p71s2556cue3et9hps48j9qq3nu1@4ax.com...
Suppose an individual emerged in the field of science who perfected the
mind/machine interface and could produce simulated realities to the exact
specifications of anyone who wishes to have one created for them. Life
forms
could even evolve and grow in the simulation either exactly as they do
here, or
in completely innovative and unprecedented ways.
Part of the manner in which the simulations would work would be that
they'd run
on the minds of individuals actually connected to them. For technical
reasons,
the feat would require those individuals to permanently abandon life in
the
"real world" as all but their central nervous system are stripped away,
their
living nerves and brain matter kept comfortably and healthfully alive in a
stream of liquid nutrients and waste-eliminating components.
You are offered a chance to be one of these initial individuals. You are
assured to your own satisfaction that once the reality you'll be helping
to
simulate is up and running, anyone in the real world who wants to visit
and
interact with you will be able to do so easily and without limit - even
going so
far as to join you permanently if they wish, the experience feeling every
bit as
real to all concerned as it ever could have felt in the real world.
Would you do it? I know I would.
1) Who controls the life support equipment?
2) What guarantees are there that the life support system will never break
down/malfunction/suffer a power out/be switched off?
3) Who controls the simulated reality?
4) What guarantees are there that the simulated reality would not/could not
be altered by someone.
The person that controlled these things would have power over your life and
death and even your thoughts and experiences.
An omnipotent living god?
At least it would be one that could be shown to exist :-)
Smiler,
The godless one
Wasn't there a Tom Cruise moving on this idea? "Vanilla sky"
Ben
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mettas Mother" |
|
| Title: Re: Simulated reality - would you if you could? |
25 Feb 2007 02:47:41 PM |
|
|
Of course not! It is a point of no return! What assurances are there that
you will be safe from torture or virus attack?
"Uncle Clover" <UncleClover@SpamMeNot.com> wrote in message
news:tks3u2p71s2556cue3et9hps48j9qq3nu1@4ax.com...
Suppose an individual emerged in the field of science who perfected the
mind/machine interface and could produce simulated realities to the exact
specifications of anyone who wishes to have one created for them. Life
forms
could even evolve and grow in the simulation either exactly as they do
here, or
in completely innovative and unprecedented ways.
Part of the manner in which the simulations would work would be that
they'd run
on the minds of individuals actually connected to them. For technical
reasons,
the feat would require those individuals to permanently abandon life in
the
"real world" as all but their central nervous system are stripped away,
their
living nerves and brain matter kept comfortably and healthfully alive in a
stream of liquid nutrients and waste-eliminating components.
You are offered a chance to be one of these initial individuals. You are
assured to your own satisfaction that once the reality you'll be helping
to
simulate is up and running, anyone in the real world who wants to visit
and
interact with you will be able to do so easily and without limit - even
going so
far as to join you permanently if they wish, the experience feeling every
bit as
real to all concerned as it ever could have felt in the real world.
Would you do it? I know I would.
--
L8r,
Uncle Clover
__________________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Every birth carries within
it the seed of its own
demise
__________________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Narrow minds
breed thick skulls.
__________________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Darkness is just light
that's traveling...
in a different direction...
than where you're looking.
__________________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Blog: "Family - The Binds That Tie"
http://bindsthattie.blogspot.com/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "satyr" |
|
| Title: Re: Simulated reality - would you if you could? |
25 Feb 2007 05:33:29 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 15:53:37 -0500, Uncle Clover
<UncleClover@SpamMeNot.com> wrote:
Suppose an individual emerged in the field of science who perfected the
mind/machine interface and could produce simulated realities to the exact
specifications of anyone who wishes to have one created for them. Life forms
could even evolve and grow in the simulation either exactly as they do here, or
in completely innovative and unprecedented ways.
Part of the manner in which the simulations would work would be that they'd run
on the minds of individuals actually connected to them. For technical reasons,
the feat would require those individuals to permanently abandon life in the
"real world" as all but their central nervous system are stripped away, their
living nerves and brain matter kept comfortably and healthfully alive in a
stream of liquid nutrients and waste-eliminating components.
So basically it would be like Christianity?
--
satyr #1953
Chairman, EAC Church Taxation Subcommittee
Director, Gideon Bible Alternative Fuel Project
Supervisor, EAC Fossil Casting Lab
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D7" |
|
| Title: Re: Simulated reality - would you if you could? |
26 Feb 2007 10:47:18 AM |
|
|
satyr <RsEaMtOyVrE@infidels.org> said:
On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 15:53:37 -0500, Uncle Clover
<UncleClover@SpamMeNot.com> wrote:
Suppose an individual emerged in the field of science who perfected the
mind/machine interface and could produce simulated realities to the exact
specifications of anyone who wishes to have one created for them. Life forms
could even evolve and grow in the simulation either exactly as they do here, or
in completely innovative and unprecedented ways.
Part of the manner in which the simulations would work would be that they'd run
on the minds of individuals actually connected to them. For technical reasons,
the feat would require those individuals to permanently abandon life in the
"real world" as all but their central nervous system are stripped away, their
living nerves and brain matter kept comfortably and healthfully alive in a
stream of liquid nutrients and waste-eliminating components.
So basically it would be like Christianity?
You have put your finger on it. It's just another wet-dream about
heaven.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Simulated reality - would you if you could? |
26 Feb 2007 09:17:22 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 15:53:37 -0500, Uncle Clover <UncleClover@SpamMeNot.com>
wrote:
Suppose an individual emerged in the field of science who perfected the
mind/machine interface and could produce simulated realities to the exact
specifications of anyone who wishes to have one created for them. Life forms
could even evolve and grow in the simulation either exactly as they do here, or
in completely innovative and unprecedented ways.
Part of the manner in which the simulations would work would be that they'd run
on the minds of individuals actually connected to them. For technical reasons,
the feat would require those individuals to permanently abandon life in the
"real world" as all but their central nervous system are stripped away, their
living nerves and brain matter kept comfortably and healthfully alive in a
stream of liquid nutrients and waste-eliminating components.
You are offered a chance to be one of these initial individuals. You are
assured to your own satisfaction that once the reality you'll be helping to
simulate is up and running, anyone in the real world who wants to visit and
interact with you will be able to do so easily and without limit - even going so
far as to join you permanently if they wish, the experience feeling every bit as
real to all concerned as it ever could have felt in the real world.
Would you do it? I know I would.
Could I still plonk the trolls?
Ben
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D7" |
|
| Title: Re: Simulated reality - would you if you could? |
25 Feb 2007 03:22:05 PM |
|
|
Uncle Clover <UncleClover@SpamMeNot.com> said:
Suppose an individual emerged in the field of science who perfected the
mind/machine interface and could produce simulated realities to the exact
specifications of anyone who wishes to have one created for them. Life forms
could even evolve and grow in the simulation either exactly as they do here, or
in completely innovative and unprecedented ways.
Part of the manner in which the simulations would work would be that they'd run
on the minds of individuals actually connected to them. For technical reasons,
the feat would require those individuals to permanently abandon life in the
"real world" as all but their central nervous system are stripped away, their
living nerves and brain matter kept comfortably and healthfully alive in a
stream of liquid nutrients and waste-eliminating components.
You are offered a chance to be one of these initial individuals. You are
assured to your own satisfaction that once the reality you'll be helping to
simulate is up and running, anyone in the real world who wants to visit and
interact with you will be able to do so easily and without limit - even going so
far as to join you permanently if they wish, the experience feeling every bit as
real to all concerned as it ever could have felt in the real world.
Would you do it? I know I would.
Here's what I'd go for: Being able to specify such a reality and enter
it, wherein the reality includes the ability to specify a next layer
of reality, and enter that, without limit to the number of layers or
their duration. The reason for this is that I imagine that my ability
to specify "next layers" over time will improve.
One thing this needs to address: is a specification of, in effect,
irreversible suicide, permitted?
Another thing to address, even though one cannot return, could one
specify a reality such that it is "just as if" the deal had never been
struck?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Simulated reality - would you if you could? |
25 Feb 2007 05:12:08 PM |
|
|
"Jim07D7" <Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:58v3u2554sa96rl3poiv75bfvi90jond1b@4ax.com...
Uncle Clover <UncleClover@SpamMeNot.com> said:
Suppose an individual emerged in the field of science who perfected the
mind/machine interface and could produce simulated realities to the exact
specifications of anyone who wishes to have one created for them. Life
forms
could even evolve and grow in the simulation either exactly as they do
here, or
in completely innovative and unprecedented ways.
Part of the manner in which the simulations would work would be that
they'd run
on the minds of individuals actually connected to them. For technical
reasons,
the feat would require those individuals to permanently abandon life in
the
"real world" as all but their central nervous system are stripped away,
their
living nerves and brain matter kept comfortably and healthfully alive in a
stream of liquid nutrients and waste-eliminating components.
You are offered a chance to be one of these initial individuals. You are
assured to your own satisfaction that once the reality you'll be helping
to
simulate is up and running, anyone in the real world who wants to visit
and
interact with you will be able to do so easily and without limit - even
going so
far as to join you permanently if they wish, the experience feeling every
bit as
real to all concerned as it ever could have felt in the real world.
Would you do it? I know I would.
Here's what I'd go for: Being able to specify such a reality and enter
it, wherein the reality includes the ability to specify a next layer
of reality, and enter that, without limit to the number of layers or
their duration. The reason for this is that I imagine that my ability
to specify "next layers" over time will improve.
One thing this needs to address: is a specification of, in effect,
irreversible suicide, permitted?
Another thing to address, even though one cannot return, could one
specify a reality such that it is "just as if" the deal had never been
struck?
The moment that one has evidence that such a thing is possible, then one can
no longer make any claims concerning reality.
In other words, given the existence of such a technology, what would make
one assume they're not already in a synthetic reality?
At that point you're free to pick one since one's as good as another.
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
http://www.ashenempires.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D7" |
|
| Title: Re: Simulated reality - would you if you could? |
26 Feb 2007 10:46:06 AM |
|
|
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> said:
"Jim07D7" <Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:58v3u2554sa96rl3poiv75bfvi90jond1b@4ax.com...
Uncle Clover <UncleClover@SpamMeNot.com> said:
Suppose an individual emerged in the field of science who perfected the
mind/machine interface and could produce simulated realities to the exact
specifications of anyone who wishes to have one created for them.
<...>
Another thing to address, even though one cannot return, could one
specify a reality such that it is "just as if" the deal had never been
struck?
The moment that one has evidence that such a thing is possible, then one can
no longer make any claims concerning reality.
In other words, given the existence of such a technology, what would make
one assume they're not already in a synthetic reality?
And then the word "synthetic" becomes superfluous.
At that point you're free to pick one since one's as good as another.
Freedom to choose one's reality is the fundamental parameter being
played with here, isn't it? We seem to have limited freedom now. In
the world Uncle Clover suggests, that freedom would be greatly
expanded. But it would still be the "real" world. And people there
might dream of even greater freedom.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Simulated reality - would you if you could? |
26 Feb 2007 02:18:41 PM |
|
|
"Jim07D7" <Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:af36u297maj4egrsmi3j8ormosjql9lqe9@4ax.com...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> said:
"Jim07D7" <Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:58v3u2554sa96rl3poiv75bfvi90jond1b@4ax.com...
Uncle Clover <UncleClover@SpamMeNot.com> said:
Suppose an individual emerged in the field of science who perfected the
mind/machine interface and could produce simulated realities to the
exact
specifications of anyone who wishes to have one created for them.
<...>
Another thing to address, even though one cannot return, could one
specify a reality such that it is "just as if" the deal had never been
struck?
The moment that one has evidence that such a thing is possible, then one
can
no longer make any claims concerning reality.
In other words, given the existence of such a technology, what would make
one assume they're not already in a synthetic reality?
And then the word "synthetic" becomes superfluous.
Hmmm. Good point, but just because one can't be sure if they're in a
synthetic reality doesn't mean there isn't a real reality at the bottom.
At that point you're free to pick one since one's as good as another.
Freedom to choose one's reality is the fundamental parameter being
played with here, isn't it? We seem to have limited freedom now. In
the world Uncle Clover suggests, that freedom would be greatly
expanded. But it would still be the "real" world. And people there
might dream of even greater freedom.
Not sure I follow...
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
http://www.ashenempires.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D7" |
|
| Title: Re: Simulated reality - would you if you could? |
26 Feb 2007 03:12:56 PM |
|
|
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> said:
"Jim07D7" <Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:af36u297maj4egrsmi3j8ormosjql9lqe9@4ax.com...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> said:
"Jim07D7" <Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:58v3u2554sa96rl3poiv75bfvi90jond1b@4ax.com...
Uncle Clover <UncleClover@SpamMeNot.com> said:
Suppose an individual emerged in the field of science who perfected the
mind/machine interface and could produce simulated realities to the
exact
specifications of anyone who wishes to have one created for them.
<...>
Another thing to address, even though one cannot return, could one
specify a reality such that it is "just as if" the deal had never been
struck?
The moment that one has evidence that such a thing is possible, then one
can
no longer make any claims concerning reality.
In other words, given the existence of such a technology, what would make
one assume they're not already in a synthetic reality?
And then the word "synthetic" becomes superfluous.
Hmmm. Good point, but just because one can't be sure if they're in a
synthetic reality doesn't mean there isn't a real reality at the bottom.
This could wander off into any number of more or less interesting
philosophical excursions.
At that point you're free to pick one since one's as good as another.
Freedom to choose one's reality is the fundamental parameter being
played with here, isn't it? We seem to have limited freedom now. In
the world Uncle Clover suggests, that freedom would be greatly
expanded. But it would still be the "real" world. And people there
might dream of even greater freedom.
Not sure I follow...
Well, Clover suggest a user-specified simulation that would become the
user's reality. (Put that in quotes if you want, but it would be the
user's reality for all intents and purposes.)
In the present reality I as a user of this reality I can imagine
certain things and make them part of reality, let's say, whether to
have a sip of red wine right now.
<sips>
What were we talking about?
Oh. Therefore, to be nontrivial, Clover's suggestion has to presuppose
that we can specify some choices we cannot now make and bring about by
the means available in this reality. For example, in this simulation,
I could have the wherewithal to be sipping wine on a starship cruise
through the highlights of the large Magellanic Cloud, with Cleopatra
anxiously wanting to retire with me for the night.
But suppose I am so doing, and when I decide to check Usenet on the
way to our cabin, there is a posting from some "Uncle Clover" that
suggests the same jump to another simulated reality is available. Say,
it's Cleopatra AND I speak her ancient Egyptian dialect. I had
forgotten to specify that.
Where does it end? I think it ends at being God.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Simulated reality - would you if you could? |
26 Feb 2007 04:50:50 PM |
|
|
"Jim07D7" <Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:krh6u2tnrh77a09v2uk5e6gjdjjd54ccpb@4ax.com...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> said:
"Jim07D7" <Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:af36u297maj4egrsmi3j8ormosjql9lqe9@4ax.com...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> said:
"Jim07D7" <Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:58v3u2554sa96rl3poiv75bfvi90jond1b@4ax.com...
Uncle Clover <UncleClover@SpamMeNot.com> said:
Suppose an individual emerged in the field of science who perfected
the
mind/machine interface and could produce simulated realities to the
exact
specifications of anyone who wishes to have one created for them.
<...>
Another thing to address, even though one cannot return, could one
specify a reality such that it is "just as if" the deal had never been
struck?
The moment that one has evidence that such a thing is possible, then one
can
no longer make any claims concerning reality.
In other words, given the existence of such a technology, what would
make
one assume they're not already in a synthetic reality?
And then the word "synthetic" becomes superfluous.
Hmmm. Good point, but just because one can't be sure if they're in a
synthetic reality doesn't mean there isn't a real reality at the bottom.
This could wander off into any number of more or less interesting
philosophical excursions.
Granted. The less said about what we can't know, the better.
At that point you're free to pick one since one's as good as another.
Freedom to choose one's reality is the fundamental parameter being
played with here, isn't it? We seem to have limited freedom now. In
the world Uncle Clover suggests, that freedom would be greatly
expanded. But it would still be the "real" world. And people there
might dream of even greater freedom.
Not sure I follow...
Well, Clover suggest a user-specified simulation that would become the
user's reality. (Put that in quotes if you want, but it would be the
user's reality for all intents and purposes.)
In the present reality I as a user of this reality I can imagine
certain things and make them part of reality, let's say, whether to
have a sip of red wine right now.
<sips>
What were we talking about?
Oh. Therefore, to be nontrivial, Clover's suggestion has to presuppose
that we can specify some choices we cannot now make and bring about by
the means available in this reality. For example, in this simulation,
I could have the wherewithal to be sipping wine on a starship cruise
through the highlights of the large Magellanic Cloud, with Cleopatra
anxiously wanting to retire with me for the night.
But suppose I am so doing, and when I decide to check Usenet on the
way to our cabin, there is a posting from some "Uncle Clover" that
suggests the same jump to another simulated reality is available. Say,
it's Cleopatra AND I speak her ancient Egyptian dialect. I had
forgotten to specify that.
Where does it end? I think it ends at being God.
But clover's idea still leaves you as a Brain-In-A Box in the real reality.
The decisions you make in your synthetic reality only affect you.
Now if one believes that happiness is the be-all and end-all victory
condition of life, then the synthetic realities obviously allow one to
"win". You'll be happy and entertained until your brain wears out.
But you'll leave little trace of your existence in the real universe.
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http//www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D7" |
|
| Title: Re: Simulated reality - would you if you could? |
26 Feb 2007 05:34:32 PM |
|
|
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> said:
"Jim07D7" <Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:krh6u2tnrh77a09v2uk5e6gjdjjd54ccpb@4ax.com...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> said:
"Jim07D7" <Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:af36u297maj4egrsmi3j8ormosjql9lqe9@4ax.com...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> said:
"Jim07D7" <Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:58v3u2554sa96rl3poiv75bfvi90jond1b@4ax.com...
Uncle Clover <UncleClover@SpamMeNot.com> said:
Suppose an individual emerged in the field of science who perfected
the
mind/machine interface and could produce simulated realities to the
exact
specifications of anyone who wishes to have one created for them.
<...>
Another thing to address, even though one cannot return, could one
specify a reality such that it is "just as if" the deal had never been
struck?
The moment that one has evidence that such a thing is possible, then one
can
no longer make any claims concerning reality.
In other words, given the existence of such a technology, what would
make
one assume they're not already in a synthetic reality?
And then the word "synthetic" becomes superfluous.
Hmmm. Good point, but just because one can't be sure if they're in a
synthetic reality doesn't mean there isn't a real reality at the bottom.
This could wander off into any number of more or less interesting
philosophical excursions.
Granted. The less said about what we can't know, the better.
At that point you're free to pick one since one's as good as another.
Freedom to choose one's reality is the fundamental parameter being
played with here, isn't it? We seem to have limited freedom now. In
the world Uncle Clover suggests, that freedom would be greatly
expanded. But it would still be the "real" world. And people there
might dream of even greater freedom.
Not sure I follow...
Well, Clover suggest a user-specified simulation that would become the
user's reality. (Put that in quotes if you want, but it would be the
user's reality for all intents and purposes.)
In the present reality I as a user of this reality I can imagine
certain things and make them part of reality, let's say, whether to
have a sip of red wine right now.
<sips>
What were we talking about?
Oh. Therefore, to be nontrivial, Clover's suggestion has to presuppose
that we can specify some choices we cannot now make and bring about by
the means available in this reality. For example, in this simulation,
I could have the wherewithal to be sipping wine on a starship cruise
through the highlights of the large Magellanic Cloud, with Cleopatra
anxiously wanting to retire with me for the night.
But suppose I am so doing, and when I decide to check Usenet on the
way to our cabin, there is a posting from some "Uncle Clover" that
suggests the same jump to another simulated reality is available. Say,
it's Cleopatra AND I speak her ancient Egyptian dialect. I had
forgotten to specify that.
Where does it end? I think it ends at being God.
But clover's idea still leaves you as a Brain-In-A Box in the real reality.
The decisions you make in your synthetic reality only affect you.
Right. THe problem with having any fallible being manage your
existence as a brain in a vat is that I can't do all that Clover says,
for example you can't specify "keep me going forever". That's why IMO
he is setting up more of a speculation on what people would like
heaven to be like. Screw all that, If I'm going to be in heaven, I
want to be God. I'll take care of keeping myself going forever.
Now if one believes that happiness is the be-all and end-all victory
condition of life, then the synthetic realities obviously allow one to
"win". You'll be happy and entertained until your brain wears out.
Happiness would do, although I'd think one stipulation would be that
if it is going to end, I don't want to know it is going to happen, or
when or experience the end. I want to be convinced it is permanent,
take a dreamless nap, and not wake up.
But then the people running the show could just terminate me as soon
as I go into that other world, and pocket the money I presume they
would charge me.
This has the makings of a mediocre Twilight Zone episode. ;-)
But you'll leave little trace of your existence in the real universe.
On a larger scale, the universe itself is going to leave little trace
of its existence.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
