= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
DanielLC 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)
You have control over what happens with the computer, and the measure of consequences is immensely greater with the computer, even if very low in both cases.
Why? It seems to me that the reverse might well be true. Measure of random unhappiness inside the computer depends on the number of bits in a brain. Measure of random unhappiness in reality (given that humans already exist) depends on the number of bits in a "diff" between a happy brain and an unhappy one, which is probably smaller.
ETA: this comment is wrong because neurons in reality are macroscopic, so you need a lot of correlated quantum randomness to flip one of them. Please disregard.
If it happens by quantum vibrations that's true, but our brains aren't perfect, and the state they go into is somewhat random. There is a reasonable chance of becoming depressed, to the point that it's actually happened in this universe many times over.