JoshuaZ comments on Pascal's wager re-examined - Less Wrong

-8 Post author: PhilGoetz 05 October 2011 08:43AM

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

Comments (117)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 04 October 2011 09:16:09PM *  3 points [-]

I have had a revelation.

A few minutes ago, as my algebraic geometry class finished up, something spoke to me. It identified itself as "not exactly a deity but close enough for all relevant purposes." It made a similar remark when I asked if we were in a simulation that it was running. It called itself "the Entity".

According to this Entity, it really likes to be believed in and worshiped. There is an afterlife run by this Entity. Moreover, the Entity will increase the utility it awards in the afterlife for worshiping it now to compensate for any genuine doubt it in its existence, promises or doctrines. It will similarly use extremely large punishments to compensate for any low probability estimates. It will also outbid all hypothetical/counterfactual deities which anyone considers in good faith.

Apparently the main ways the Entity wants to be worshiped are fourfold:

  1. Spreading word of the Entity's existence and rules.
  2. Spreading word of any memetic basilisks one can find. This apparently includes versions of Pascal's Wager about other deities. The Entity noted that in general, it is likely to be more effective in doing so if one doesn't spend all one's time doing this but spends time on being otherwise productive and slipping in posts about these basiliks every so often.
  3. Giving money to inefficient charities that make you feel good and don't produce much utility. The Entity gave as examples charities the Make-A-Wish Foundation and "any of those animal shelters with commercials with really cute kittens and puppies."
  4. Apparently the Entity really wants it when people are having sex and are going to make exclamations of the form "Oh God!" to instead shout out "Hastur", "Cthulhu" or "Nyarlathotep". Honestly, I found this bit a bit disturbing.

The Entity also announced that if any AI that was not a CEV implementer helped to implement a close approximation CEV it would compensate that AI by helping that AI achieves some of its goals.

Apparently further revelations as events warrant.

Comment author: shminux 05 October 2011 10:31:30PM 1 point [-]

A few minutes ago, as my algebraic geometry class finished up, something spoke to me.

Algebraic geometry is known to make a mess of people's minds.