= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
SquirrelInHell comments on Morality of Doing Simulations Is Not Coherent [SOLVED, INVALID] - 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 (34)
It seems to me you are taking my assumption of linearity on the wrong level. To be exact, I need the assumption of linearity of the operator of calculating future-time snapshots (fixed in the article).
This is entirely different from your example.
Imagine for example how the Fourier Transform is linear as an operation.
OK. I think I see what you are getting at.
First, one could simply reject your conclusion:
The argument here is something like "just because you did the calculations differently doesn't mean your calculations failed to simulate a consciousness". Without a real model of how computation gives rise to consciousness (assuming it does), this is hard to resolve.
Second, one could simply accept it: there are some ways to do a given calculation which are ethical, and some ways that aren't.
I don't particularly endorse either of these, by the way (I hold no strong position on simulation ethics in general). I just don't see how your argument establishes that simulation morality is incoherent.