= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
PhilGoetz comments on Other Existential Risks - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (120)
Is there no post somewhere on LW explaining why paradises are bad? A paradise must be all exploitation and no exploration; hence, they are static.
Jehovah's Witnesses interpret a paradise as a CEV. For example that humans will never able to grasp the full complexity of God is a feature that will allow for infinite exploration and satisfaction of our curiosity. We'll never run out of fun and challenges. So I'm not sure what definition of paradise you had in mind. But even colloquial a paradise implies that which brings satisfaction. Even most religious people are not as naive to suggest that there won't be losers and winners. Or that a paradise would be static.
Not voted, because I think this is utterly fascinating and entirely off topic!
I don't need a specific paradise in mind. Paradise means bad things don't happen, which means the entire society is highly optimized. Being highly-optimized requires being static. This is a general property of search/optimization algorithms.
I'm not sure why I should believe this. Given that one of the properties that we're presumably optimizing over is 'not being static'.
I'm well aware of what you're talking about, when I referred to paradise I meant the word in a very broad sense.