prase comments on Completeness of simulations - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (31)
Is the fact that the simulated subject is a human important for the proposed thought experiment, besides that it activates all sorts of wrong intuitions about free will and makes the lookup table unimaginably huge or even infinite?
It is not, why should it be? By assumption the subject does whatever the GLUT predicts but it doesn't follow that the GLUT includes a proposition "if the subject is confronted with the information that the GLUT predicts that he will do X, he will do X".
I don't think so, any Turing machine will do.