RobinHanson comments on [video] Robin Hanson: Uploads Economics 101 - Less Wrong

6 Post author: mapnoterritory 05 August 2012 09:00PM

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

Comments (54)

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

Comment author: gwern 06 August 2012 10:00:32PM *  5 points [-]

Notes:

  • So he's writing a book on em economics? I'm actually a little disappointed - I was hoping for a grand synthesis of all the health care/Near-Far/signaling material on OB. Well, hopefully he'll be able to marshal all sorts of good details and analogies that he has to skim over in a talk (eg. when he talked about the big economy being spatially small, I thought of the Kuznets curve; location made me think of datacenters, which fortunately he did bring up)
  • An Apple user. Always kind of thought of him as a PC.
  • The transition example is interesting. I didn't realize that there would be several years before world growth hits insane numbers like 100+% annual growth. This undermines some of my ideas about investing for an em scenario: instead of investing now heavily in equities, it may be better to instead wait for world growth to hit 7%+ and then invest as frantically as possible.
  • Luxurious virtual environments will be common: this seems trivially false or at least questionable. Just previously, he points out that wages and costs will fall to the level at which another em can be created/copied. Even if a luxurious virtual environment were cheap in some absolute sense, that doesn't say they'll be cheap in a relative sense. Existing virtual environments require specialized hardwired mini-supercomputers (GPUs) to handle rendering environments, much of which is static, and fall far short of 'luxury'. (As nice as any existing video game like Crysis may look, would you not find being imprisoned in it very unpleasant, to say nothing of extremely luxurious?) AAA games are in a well-known death spiral as the gigabytes of artwork and other demands inflate production costs into the hundreds of millions already. I'd find this point much more convincing if he instead took a tack more like 'yes, it will require terabytes of artwork and gigaflops of rendering, but this will only be 1% or less of the most plausible estimates for emulating minds, and so it's quite plausible such environments will yield a +1% productivity improvement' (until selection pressures eliminate the need or desire for luxurious environments because that's 1% that could be spent better, anyway...).
  • It was notably light on the issues of values (farmer vs forager) and selection pressure leading to em hell.
  • It was much longer and more comprehensive than I thought. It stands as a pretty decent summary of all the em posts on OB.
Comment author: RobinHanson 09 August 2012 02:46:54AM *  2 points [-]

Maybe I can write more on near-far and signaling in another book. One thing at a time. Most of the things that make our physical world luxurious or impoverished have little to do with the cost of simulating them. A dirty smelly hut is just as expensive to simulate as a vast mansion. Yes, they might spend 0.1% more relative to brain computing costs on computing VR if that increases work productivity by more than 0.1%.

Comment author: khafra 17 August 2012 01:40:33AM 1 point [-]

The point: Not that a vast mansion will be too difficult to simulate relative to a smelly hut, but that anything simulated in sufficient detail will become luxury, while non-wealthy ems live in the relative squalor of palatial mansions that just don't look/feel/sound/smell quite right, in an unpleasant way.

Comment author: RobinHanson 25 August 2012 02:22:14AM *  2 points [-]

Yes, anything is expensive to sim in very high detail. But it isn't at all clear that in typical settings the amount of detail you can get for say 0.1% of the cost of running a brain is usually unpleasant or disturbing.

Comment author: khafra 26 August 2012 09:50:12PM 0 points [-]

You're right, my intuitions had been swayed toward the "expensive verisimilitude" direction by the part in the beginning of Permutation City where the EMs keep committing suicide.

Comment author: gwern 09 August 2012 03:17:54AM 0 points [-]

A dirty smelly hut is just as expensive to simulate as a vast mansion.

A mansion will have dozens or hundreds of rooms; how can equally difficult rooms be just as expensive to simulate when there are hundreds more rooms in one scenario than another?

Comment author: RobinHanson 09 August 2012 10:36:02AM 3 points [-]

If the em is only in one room at a time, only one room must be simulated in detail at any one time.

Comment author: [deleted] 09 August 2012 11:35:04AM 4 points [-]

The future will have little winding passages constructed to prevent line-of-sight from one room to another?

Deus Ex was righter than they knew.

Comment author: gwern 09 August 2012 01:58:36PM 0 points [-]

The rooms will still need to be designed and available somewhere; even AAA games can't get away with indefinitely big canned environments no matter how many paging or zoning tricks they use to reduce the immediate rendering costs.