Bugmaster comments on Causal Universes - Less Wrong

60 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 29 November 2012 04:08AM

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

Comments (385)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Bugmaster 28 November 2012 06:19:48PM 8 points [-]

So far, we've just generated all 2^N possible bitstrings of size N, for some large N; nothing more. You wouldn't expect this procedure to generate any people or make any experiences real, unless enumerating all finite strings of size N causes all lawless universes encoded in them to be real.

Wait, why not ? If people can be encoded as bit strings -- which is the prerequisite for any kind of a Singularity -- then what's the difference between a bit string that I obtained by scanning a person, and a completely identical bit string that I just happened to randomly generate ?

Comment author: Snowyowl 29 November 2012 08:14:45AM 7 points [-]

You make a surprisingly convincing argument for people not being real.

Comment author: Nornagest 29 November 2012 08:23:07AM 3 points [-]

Depends what you mean by "people", and what you mean by "real", really.

Comment author: Bugmaster 29 November 2012 08:29:44AM 2 points [-]

I could apply the same argument to rocks, or stars, or any other physical object. They can be encoded as bit strings, too -- well, at least hypothetically speaking.

Comment author: Username 02 December 2012 08:37:07PM *  2 points [-]

what's the difference between a bit string that I obtained by scanning a person, and a completely identical bit string that I just happened to randomly generate ?

I suppose the difference is knowing to put the number into your bit string interpreter. Whether that be a computer program or the physical universe.

It's kind of like the arguments for "you can't copyright a number". Well sure, but when you stick .mp3 on the end it isn't just a number any more - it now tells you that you should interpret it.

Comment author: Bugmaster 03 December 2012 12:30:27AM 1 point [-]

Agreed, but then, I still disagree with Eliezer when he says that when you generate 2^N possible bitstrings of size N, "you wouldn't expect this procedure to generate any people or make any experiences real". If I can generate all these strings in the first place, I could just as easily feed each one to my person-emulator, to see which of them are valid person-strings. Then I could emulate these people just as I emulate meat-based people whose brains I'd scanned.

Comment author: JoachimSchipper 28 November 2012 09:02:55PM 0 points [-]

It's not too hard to write Eliezer's 2^48 (possibly invalid) games of non-causal-Life to disk; but does that make any of them real? As real as the one in the article?

Comment author: Bugmaster 28 November 2012 09:50:08PM 4 points [-]

I am having trouble figuring out what the word "real" means when applied to the game of Life. I do know, however, that if my Life game client had a "load game" function, then it would accept any valid string of bits, regardless of where they came from -- a previously saved game, or a random number generator.