= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Dmytry comments on Getting Nearer - 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 (23)
whats about my position: I am not entirely sure that God creator of universe does not exist*, but I am very sure that religions are not positively linked to existence of God, and if anything, plurality of them, internal contradictions, and behaviour of them towards eachother constitutes weak evidence for non-existence of God in general, and very strong evidence for non-existence of God as defined by any of the religions.
Consequently, someone could call me 'militant' when it comes to atheism - i see religions as evil - but i'm technically agnostic.
(*it is actually conditional for me on what has lower Kolmogorov complexity: our universe which eventually self organizes us, intelligent observers, or an universe which eventually self organize a single intelligence that fills all of it and proceeds to do stuff like 'imagining' universes and otherwise be bored. Note that those 2 things may be equivalent; we don't know how it will turn out, and the 'singularity' may indeed end up with singular intelligence)
This depends on how you define Kolmogorov complexity of universes. The Turing machine that simulates all other Turing machines is not the best explanation for all nontrivial universes if you require the explanation to be empirical.
Yes, of course. I do think that there will be a formalization of KC that's fairly language independent, though. Basically, KC is here as a form of Occam's razor.
Also, the comparison between those 2 universe rules may directly yield the complexity difference, e.g. removal of rule leading to god-making. In any case I don't think it'll be possible to make any progress on this until superintelligence, which won't need any of our insights. That is kind of depressing thought.
Do you think its the correct form of Occam's razor? In other words, does Occam's razor properly take a unique form?