gwern comments on Rationality Quotes September 2011 - Less Wrong

7 Post author: dvasya 02 September 2011 07:38AM

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

Comments (482)

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

Comment author: wnoise 21 September 2011 06:05:30AM 3 points [-]

AFAIK, in the original script the AIs were exploiting humans not for energy, but for the computing capacity in their brains.

I have many times heard fans say this. Not once have any produced any evidence. Can you do so?

Comment author: RichardKennaway 21 September 2011 07:53:32AM *  4 points [-]

The only evidence I have is that it's so obviously the way the story should be. That's good enough for me. It does not matter precisely what fallen demiurge corrupted the parable away from its original perfection.

ETA: Just to clarify, I mean that as far as I'm concerned, brains used as computing substrate is the real story, even if it never crossed the Wachowskis' minds. Just like some people say there was never a sequel (although personally I didn't have a problem with it).

Comment author: wnoise 21 September 2011 03:14:51PM 3 points [-]

And like any urban legend, that is why this explanation spreads so easily.

Comment author: Tripitaka 21 September 2011 04:39:24PM 1 point [-]

Is not the alternative plot as faulted as the original plot, insofar as if the brainy computing substrate is used for something other than to run the originial software (humans) there is are no need to actually simulate a matrix?

Comment author: Nornagest 21 September 2011 05:04:49PM 4 points [-]

Not only that, but I'm pretty sure building an interface that'd let you run arbitrary software on a human brain would be at least as hard and resource-intensive as building an artificial brain. We reach the useful limits of this kind of speculation pretty quickly, though; the films aren't supposed to be hard sci-fi.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 21 September 2011 07:41:17PM 2 points [-]

You just need to stipulate that the brain can't stay healthy enough to do that without running a person.

But I'm not much interested in retconning a parable into hard science.