Ok, thank you very much. But why then do so many people take the argument seriously? Is it surprising that the peer reviewed process didn’t pick up this problem?
Alex Williams
Karma: −50
“If we could run a vast number of simulations someday, that would be strong statistical evidence in favor of the third alternative. And we would know nothing of them, just as people living in our simulations wouldn’t know anything about us.”
If we actually do this and run those simulations then we would know that we aren’t in any of them. What is the connection between the Indifference Principle and this strong statistical evidence? Thank you, I am appreciative.
Like, I am surprised the article made it through the peer-review process without someone noting that problem.
Ok, thank you very much. But why then do so many people take the argument seriously?
Okay, and thank you very much. But how do we know that if the universe timeline were run over and over again that it would be positive in value? Why not think that the future’s value “in expectation” is neutral or very negative? Everyone seems to assume that the future will be good! Why?
Thanks for this. :)
Thank you. I am just wondering though, When you say “each civ,” what do you mean? What are these civilizations? Why assume they exist? What motivates the idea that there are other civilizations that run simulations sufficiently similar to our own world (as strange and contingent as its laws and constants are)?