/int/ - International

Vee haff wayz to make you post.

Eintragsmodus: Antworten [Zurück] [Gehe nach unten]

Betreff:
Säge:
Kommentar:
Zeichnung: x Zeichenfläche
Dateien:
Passwort: (Kommentarlöschung)
  • Erlaubte Dateitypen: GIF, JPG, PNG, NetzM, OGG, ZIP und mehr
  • Maximale Anzahl von Dateien pro Post: 4
  • Maximale Dateigröße pro Post: 100.00 MB
  • Lies die Regeln bevor du postest.
jp Bernd 2025-09-10 19:07:25 Nr. 9690
Oinker of Good Sleep
.jpg

Datei öffnen 51.66 KB, 590x582
Pfostenbild
According to the Swedish philosopher Nick Bostrom, 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. Does Bernd feel like he's living in a simulation? Expiate your oceans.
at Bernd 2025-09-10 19:16:33 Nr. 9692
Just_as_planned_tzeentch
.jpg

Datei öffnen 89.56 KB, 620x433
Pfostenbild
I think Tzeentch is secretly the Emperor.
ch Bernd 2025-09-10 19:56:01 Nr. 9694
sleep tight porker
ch Bernd 2025-09-10 19:59:47 Nr. 9695
sleep tight porker
de Bernd 2025-09-10 20:17:16 Nr. 9696
sleep tight porker
me Bernd 2025-09-10 21:37:53 Nr. 9726
the simulation argument is stupid because all the arguments towards the simulation can endlessly be made for the world in which the supposed simulation is running, so its like an infinite simulation of simulations which never exits into any kind of real world. basically their arguments are arguing for the argument that no "real world" exists or is even theoretically possible. but those are just semantics. if real world is impossible and doesnt exist but all what exists is the simulation then the simulation is the real world
by Bernd 2025-09-10 21:58:25 Nr. 9731
As long as the simulation follows consistent rules, there's no difference between living a simulation and a computable universe. So if you believe in a computable universe, the question is an idle one (except in the context of anthropic arguments, but then it becomes about whether you sample once from every class or once from every instance). If you believe in a noncomputable universe, the question becomes, what are the observable differences? Do you think there is a true random source at the center of the cosmos?