pan comments on [Open Thread] Stupid Questions (2014-02-17) - Less Wrong

3 Post author: solipsist 17 February 2014 05:34AM

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

Comments (136)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: pan 17 February 2014 10:26:32PM 0 points [-]

This is probably a stupid question:

How is rounding error not a fatal flaw in brain simulation? Meaning, even if you could copy the workings of someones brain perfectly, it's presumably still a calculation done on some computer in some way. So even if you store the first X digits of every number in the calculation, it would at some point diverge from what the real brain did, even if it took a very long time.

Therefore is it fair to call that copy that 'person' or rather do you have to switch to speaking in terms of fidelities: that copy is Y percent the original person and diverges at a rate of Z percent every so many steps?

Comment author: gjm 17 February 2014 11:35:25PM 9 points [-]

Yes, the two will diverge. But then, so they would even without rounding error, on account of quantum mechanics.

Neither of them is "the original person" (you are not, now, quite the same person as you were a year ago). Both are, so to speak, descendants of the original person. There are many (apparently) possible descendants -- you never know what might happen to you, after all. A good enough simulation would be as much like one of those as they are like one another. (I suppose that's a definition of "good enough".)

Comment author: CellBioGuy 18 February 2014 05:56:36AM 7 points [-]

You don't even need quantum mechanics. The closest thing you can use to describe the way that cells actually function is 'noisy differential equations'. With emphasis on 'noisy'.

Comment author: ThisSpaceAvailable 18 February 2014 04:57:23AM 3 points [-]

Since humans have a finite lifespan, if the point of divergence takes long enough, then it doesn't matter. And even if one wishes to simulate an immortal being, if one has unlimited resources, one can perform a sequence of simulations, each one twice as long as the previous.

Comment author: ChristianKl 18 February 2014 11:11:35PM 0 points [-]

Even an actually person diverges from who they are at 20 years of age to who they are at 40 years of age. Calling the person over that timeframe the same person means that you do allow some changes.

As far as I understand proponent of uploading think that the brain will be simulated enough that the changes in the person will be as trivial as a few years of learning.