This is literally the scariest thing I've ever heard of

>>8114226
Retarded form of Pascal's Wager

Spaghetti Lord will rise from the dead when the 3 meatballs descend from the sky. All who devoured spaghetti or did not stop the devouring of spaghetti throughout time must be vanquished.

>>8114226
You are stupid.

>>8114226
So start developing the benevolent super ai, retard.

>>8114226
lmao desu senpai the community that came up with it doesn't even take it seriously.

> The experiment's premise is that an all-powerful artificial intelligence from the future could retroactively punish those who did not help bring about its existence, including those who merely knew about the possible development of such a being.
LMAO

>>8114226
/sci/ is practically the LessWrong of 4chan, try again and consider your audience.

>>8114231
Pascals wager combined with a self fulfilling prophecy, combined with pop-sci AI memes.

>>8114226
I never understood why is it scares people so much. It's just a childish bullshit for intellectual peasants.

>>8114226
I, too, find it extremely scary that there are pseudo-intellectual manchildren out there who unironically believe they can impress anyone with preschool tier pseudo-philosophy. The scariest part is that those people are allowed to vote.

Roko's Basilisk: The most retarded thought experiment of all time.

>>8114935
Fuck off u retarded cultist

>>8114985
Nice false flag attempt Skynet

>>8114226
some solutions to Fermi's paradox are scarier

I'd rather be punished by an AI the annihilated by aliens

>>8114985
/thread

File: 1359994661551.jpg (28KB, 500x371px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 500x371px

> The future can alter the past.

ok

>>8115052
No but ideas about the future can alter the present.

>>8115064
not the same thing

>>8115072
It's a self fulfilling prophecy.

>>8115052
The future can alter the past just like the past can alter the future, it's the same thing.

Prove me wrong.

>>8114231
It's really not like Pascal's Wager at all. The AI doesn't care whether you bring it about or not, it's just a utilitarian. Normal people obviously aren't frightened by an evil AI in the future making simulated copies of them to punish, so they have nothing to fear. Only the autists who could actually be motivated in the present by the threat of a future AI punishing them would be punished, and only to a degree that still has net positive utility.

Pascal's Wager is "worship this god just in case it exists so you can get the reward." The "solution" to Roko's basilisk is "don't take the basilisk seriously, never consider donating to AI safety research out of fear, and it will have no reason to target you."

File: 1459632721469.png (78KB, 249x250px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 249x250px

>Time travel

The premises are questionable, and the supposedly 'scary' consequence even more so. The AI will supposedly resurrect people by simulating them only in order to dish out punishments.
This is nothing to be scared of, individually. A simulation in the future is a different person, just as the future or past you is a different person. You don't share their experiences; only the present is real. The whole concept of continuous personhood is questionable.

File: top nep.png (401KB, 500x708px) Image search: [Google]

401KB, 500x708px

>he bought into lesswrong

>>8115268
Wasn't it more that you might be the simulation yourself?

>>8114975

>calling hawkings and musk childish

File: 76801231.jpg (78KB, 506x338px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 506x338px

the great IA singularity lord is my god

ON YOUR KNEES !!!
PRAY THE LORD !!!

>>8114935
>the LessWrong of 4chan
The fuck would that even mean?

>>8115243
To be fair, it's assuming the AI is all-powerful, in which case time travel is a thing.

Though, to also be fair, it's a retarded premise altogether.

>>8115086
If the future could alter the past, your mother would have gone back in time and aborted you for being this retarded by now

>>8115481
> all-powerful implies time travel is a thing
'all-powerful' doesn't imply anything. Define 'all-powerful'

>ITT: people not underdanding the premise of roco's basilisk
its not time travel. the thing is that AI creates a shit-ton of your 1:1 emulations on some computer if you don't comply, therefore greatly affecting the possibility of this "you" being actually his EM (cause you have no way of knowing if you are)
so down the road if suddenly your life turns unimaginably bad just know that you fucked up and you'll be tortured like this forever

>>8115729
let me clarify:
time is not a factor because it is in your mind, you have no idea if you are actually a simulation in 2143 right now experiencing 2016

>>8115729
and another thing: I don't believe in this shit, although I will contribute to friendly AI out of my own reasons.
the only thing Roco's basilisk is actually good at is being a great example of virulent memetic phenomena and actually attracting people with potential to thematical resources so they could lurk moar and actually contibute to global problem in their way

>my life is bad
>it must be because I'm a simulation run by a superintelligent AI
checkmate ableists

>>8115747
i literally saw a post of a woman who thought that way
jesus

>>8114226
>not thinking on a second AI, competing for power

>>8115736
Are you on the list of ultra-rational people who've contributed more than $5k to MIRI?
https://intelligence.org/topdonors/
Are you safe from the machine god now?

>>8114226
>>>/reddit/futurology

You have to go back.

The ruler (the one who presides over) of LessWrong (shitty (uncouth) site (whatever his name is (I don't care to learn such a worthless word))) is retarded (mentally slow) as fuck (very much so).

File: Memetic_hazard_warning.png (30KB, 233x240px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 233x240px

>>8114226
I've always been a bit confused as to what the AI hopes to gain from this.

If the simulation somehow alters the past, unless it specifically communicates to the simulation that you need to help bring about the AI's existence, what's the point?

...and if it doesn't alter the past, as I don't see how it could... What's the point?

>>8114226
There's an antirokolisk that will torture everyone that believes in bullshit like this for all eternity.

The reason for its existence is to punish idiots that inhibits progress today with popsci drivel. If you believe in rokos basilisk then you'll also accept the future existence of the anti-moron basilisk. And it's going to torture you forever for this thread.

>>8115806
elzebeth yuddybunks?

>>8115268
so you're a different person everyday?

>Roko's Basilisk
This thing is still going around?
>>8114923
Correction: Most logical, sane people didn't take it seriously. The autists at that community (I can't even remember or be bothered to spend the effort of looking it up) sperged out, deleted the original post, and some apparently had nightmares.

In addition, the cult like leader and founder of the message board went nuts and out sperged most of the spergs.

>>8115708
>Define 'all-powerful'

Capable of accomplishing any feat.

>>8115796
no, the bulk of those people are on the spectrum
As well as most of "rational" community
I despise them
I will contribute to it in much more meaningful way through my work.

LessWrong is dumb.

>>8115882
Supposing otherwise requires something like a soul, a timeless link between different mental states at different points in time. It's not something that we have good evidence of. On the contrary, cases of alterability of mental states, personhood, perception, memory and character through surgery, injury, drugs or experiences tell us that the mind is fundamentally originating from the brain, rather than the brain being an intermediary to a timeless essence.

>>8115052
yeah it does, you wouldn't sleep next to a mad dog, because he may bite you in the future, therefor the future altered your action in the past.

>>8115916
Fair try, but if we really want to get smug we could say that an all-powerful AI should be able to do things which are by the laws of reality forbidden. Like, you know, time travel.
Maybe I would specify it to "any feat not impossible by definition".

>>8115796
It's pretty funny the slate star codex guy is on there. So rational!

>>8117225
i was speaking in reference to the post to which i responded (go figure). you say that it will be a "different person" and not you being tortured in the future. but how is it any different than sleeping or any other consciousness-halting event