= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Vladimir_Nesov comments on The ethics of randomized computation in the multiverse - 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 (36)
The measure of the branches where the computer contain any such program, as opposed to total nonsense, is so small as to be ignorable. There's no point in worrying about it, because it practically doesn't happen.
More specifically, I'm pretty sure us humans don't have any negative parts of our utility function that grow exponentially with "badness," so there's no bad outcome that can overcome the exponential decrease in probability with program size to actually be a significant factor.
The more competent AIs will be conquering the universe, so it's value of the universe being optimized in each of the possible ways that's playing against low measure.
If that's what we're worried about, then we might as well ask whether it's risky to randomly program a classical computer and then run it.
My argument is about utility, but probability is low. On the other hand, with enough computational power a sufficiently clever evolutionary dynamic might well blow up the universe.