I just read Nick Bostrom's simulation-argument as a who

>>8575994
What's the TL;DR?

>>8575994
>Found any flaws?

Other than the fact it's retarded?

>>8576006
>implying that anon got anything else than bullshit coming trough his mouth against the argument

>Moreover, we would have to suspect that the posthumans running our simulation are themselves simulated beings; and their creators, in turn, may also be simulated beings.

the simulation argument is at least more plausible than the creationist argument

Who created the computers that created our reality, though? And so on, and so on.

Turtles all the way down.

>>8576042
Basically, you have humans who then evolve into a superior strain of human and so on. As they evolve, they create a simulation and so on. We are part of this cycle of simulations.

>>8576051
Fuck. Fractals seem realer than ever right now.

>>8576056
If this was actually the truth, it would suck. I have being a creature with higher intelligence, why can't I just root around in the mud looking for tasty truffles? Why do I have to be so damn self-aware? Fear of death sucks, I'd rather not know and just enjoy eating, sleeping and fucking.

>>8576057
I think we have found the truth. I'm very sorry. For me, and for you.

>>8575994
Nothing we do, observe, or say can ever disprove this argument.

This means it is an unfalsifiable hypothesis.

This means it is completely meaningless and it is pointless to discuss whether or not it is true, since it can have no consequence.

>>8576069
I wish I was a wild boar in the middle of the Amazon rainforest away from any nasty humans.

Nobody fucking knows

Then, some retard comes along and says I KNOW

Then, a lot of even more retarded retards who want to think they know come along and go OH YEAH I BELIEVE HIM, HE KNOWS

THE

END

>>8576096
wow

>>8576096
As long as you have that respect needed to have people follow, at least use it for the good that you know

File: religion.jpg (12KB, 236x165px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 236x165px

>>8576096

>>8576070
exept if we eventually do create an universe simulation, and fastforward to find some alien doin the same, it'd be no proof, but the chances would like, increase alot..
Of course, now, its untestable, because we lack the tech (duh)

>>8576125
fractals

fractals, man

they're incomprehensible but they're real

What was the origin of the originators?

File: wpid-photo-20150804001125738[1].jpg (207KB, 1698x1131px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 1698x1131px

>>8576158
witch was the origin of the big bang? i mean, im not "against it" of course, but, if it could happen, and also smart civilizations can simulate universes out of reading and running the original rules of the universe, then, you could assume the first one did start with a "real" big bang, then created ours, though they probably also could not know if they are the first ones or not, same if we eventually get there.

A simulation would be controlled by being in another simulation who would be in another simulation and so on. Occam's razor, boi

>>8576174
yeah, but if we do manage to do it, then the best assumption we have is that we're not the first.
tho we'd probably still would be unable to test if we're the first ones or not. the people we created cant either, and the ones they'll create probably also cant.

nowadays, yes, its just a pretty cool idea that would only be responded when and if we get there. but there is no problem disscussing it if you dont take opinions as facts...

I'm just an ever-increasing manifold of pain. Always thinking about ending itself until it does,

This is why the world belongs to normies. The plants of the human world.

>>8576125
Didn't one of the black science mans find the computer code that underlies reality?

>>8576218
*tips astronomical fedora*

>>8576057
>. I have being a creature with higher intelligence,
Sure you were.

>>8576220
idk, its sounds pretty bullshit-y, hype-ing/misunderstanding some study. do you have a link?

>>8576220
GATES! Right, that was his name. A name that everyone, even a brainlet like me should know.

>>8576230
I don't have a link. I just heard him giving a talk about this. But he's a string theorist that appeared in one of the Brian Greene PBS documentaries.
>inb4 string theory is bullshit

>>8576223
I might commit suicide sometime soon. Thanks for pushing me to do it!

>>8576004
>at least one of the following propositions is true:
>(1) the human species is very likely to go extinct before reaching a “posthuman” stage;
>(2) any posthuman civilization is extremely unlikely to run a significant number of simulations of their evolutionary history (or variations thereof);
>(3) we are almost certainly living in a computer simulation. It follows that the belief that there is a significant chance that we will one day become posthumans who run ancestor-simulations is false, unless we are currently living in a simulation. A number of other consequences of this result are also discussed.

>>8575994
>Since the author tells that there is no evidence against those 3 claims.

That's retard logic. It's really easy to make something up that can't be disproven.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot

>>8576234
>>8576231
Yo, i just read "found computer code for reality" and i tought "thats a nice catchy article title to clickbait people with i want a link to know what hes talkin bout", i didnt think he was talking string theory.

>>8576236
No prob m8, have a happy death, i wish i had the balls to try it myself

>>8576239
We have NO lines of reasoning that reveal the origin of the universe. All speculation about this will forever remain as speculative as all other speculation. ("god did it" "simulation-creating ayy lmaos did it" "etc"). But we can still speculate, which is what we're doing itt. So your claim to a lack of evidence does not apply here.

>>8576253
yeah, but this is /sci/, you're saying this is basically the same that believing on god or not so yeah.
But anyway, if we do end up with advanced enought tech and science, you may have a way to get proof.
or maybe only to know that theres an unnignorable chance that we're not the first ones.
But if you made an universe replica or various of them, then you need the same assumptions you need for the original big bang, that is for the first "real" universe. who themselves couldn't really know if they were also the first.

Also remember, that we get killed off before supertech, dosnt mean every civilization does, so just one being able to do it opens the way for infinite other civilizations that could also give it a try and so on

>>8576263
you are the equivalent of a grammar nazi for this board

>>8576268
Nope, im just pontin out, that this can be a reasonable theory if we ever get the tech to research it.

Id love it to be true, it'd be like the universe growing in complexity trough life and making a buncha new universes trough intelligent civilizations. also being possible for someone to "become the god" of an universe.

I mean, is cool as shit but that dosnt make it real, and also it not being testable does not mean we cant discuss it.