[extropy-chat] Are ancestor simulations immoral?
sjatkins at mac.com
Thu Jun 1 02:39:41 UTC 2006
On May 31, 2006, at 8:06 AM, Russell Wallace wrote:
> On 5/31/06, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at tsoft.com> wrote:
> Please!! To those of you in the far future who are running this
> simulation! JEFFREY IS OUT OF HIS MIND, AND IS NOT SPEAKING FOR
> THE REST OF US! This is a very *fine* simulation, thank you!
> It's just swell! We are so grateful!
> Lee has a good point here. Suppose this is a simulation. Would you
> rather the simulators had just left the machines running a flying
> windows screen saver? Would you rather not have lived at all? Me, I
> think on the whole life as it is has positive value, so I prefer it
> to not having lived. (Now I think there are ways it could have more
> strongly positive value; but the solution to that is to work on
> improving it, not to proclaim simulations immoral.)
Dunno. If it was an ancestor simulation it might not be set up to
run up to Singularity at all. This might be one of the countless
ways to fail simulations. But all of this stuff is starting to
strike me as an angels-dancing-on-a-pin waste of energy we could be
using in an attempt to insure Singularity.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat