Only in a very specific sense of "exist". Do hallucinations exist? That-which-is-being-hallucinated does not, but the mental phenomenon does exist.
One might in a similar vein interpret the question "do tulpas exist?" as "are there people who can deliberately run additional minds on their wetware and interact with these minds by means of a hallucinatory avatar?". I would argue that the tulpa's inability to do anything munchkiny is evidence against their existence even in this far weaker sense.
This reminds me of the Abramelin operation, a ritual that supposedly summons guardian angels.
He estimated the sun was no more than 20 million years old, and presumably did not expect it to last for more than a few tens of millions of years more.
Fun fact : the Vulcan greeting originated in ancient Egypt.
as it (MWI) requires uncountable worlds created in any finite instance of time
How is that any more problematic than doing physics with real or complex numbers in the first place?
can you conceive of a reason (not necessarily the officially stated one) that the actual basilisk discussion ought to be suppressed, even at the cost of the damage done to LW credibility (such as it is) by an offsite discussion of such suppression?
The basilisk is harmless. Eliezer knows this. The streisand effect was the intended consequence of the censor. The hope is that people who become aware of the basilisk will increase their priors for the existence of real information hazards, and will in the future be less likely to read anything marked as such. It's all a clever memetic inoculation program!
disclaimer : I don't actually believe this.
View more: Next
Subscribe to RSS Feed
I was taking a statement from this great-grandparent post and surrounding posts at face value
By "do something munchkiny", I meant these "obvious ways to exploit having a tulpa", presumably including remembering things you don't and other cognitive enhancements.
Why do I think they can't? Because the (hypothetical?) domain experts say so.