Jack comments on The Wannabe Rational - Less Wrong

31 Post author: MrHen 15 January 2010 08:09PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (296)

Comments (296)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Jack 16 January 2010 05:09:53AM 2 points [-]

Are most of those possible futures with no world simulations because of the destruction of human civilization, or because humans transcend and ancestor simulations are deemed to be something like unethical?

Yes.

Also, we might just be too poor in the future (either too poor to run any or too poor to run many). And if it wasn't included in "humans transcend", a Singleton could prohibit them.

Comment author: Kevin 17 January 2010 12:23:53AM *  0 points [-]

Those are certainly possibilities, but we are comparing infinite sets here. Or comparing uncountable futures. I recognize that my premise may "seem" wrong, but I don't think we can convince each other until we can take this out of the realm of comparing infinities.

Comment author: Jack 17 January 2010 04:05:53AM 0 points [-]

I don't think they're uncountable. It's just a continuous probability distribution.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit