Simulation

One common thing I see discussed on 4 chan is like "simulation" and shit. What is the actual belief that surrounds this

Other urls found in this thread:

localroger.com/prime-intellect/mopiidx.html
youtube.com/watch?v=yWO-cvGETRQ
myredditnudes.com/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

This is the algorithm

localroger.com/prime-intellect/mopiidx.html
Here's a great start.

u havent heard these queers talking about the matrix and waking up and shit? yer a lost cause ya dummy

nope, but neither is this :P

It's entirely possible we are just a high detail simulation that has been designed to show the effects of enviroemtal changes on a global population.

youtube.com/watch?v=yWO-cvGETRQ

Complete nonsense.

Might as well believe in God.

Im leaning toward the idea of a single simulation built for me everyone else is A.I including you

The World Simulation is out of control. The point of divergence was the Tory majority in the 2015 UK election. The divergence compounded with Brexit, and completely spiraled off course with Trump.

This instance of the World Simulation is now being used as a control study, before it's eventual reset.

>4 chan
>kekistan flag

Fuck off.

Even if its a "simulation" this doesnt solve shit what was the first thing every and how was it made? All these maybe a simulation,higgs field, all the other fields all these are just inbetween steps how made these fields?

op is new fag so what

That flag is even worse, faggot.

>new fag
>EU flag

Fuck off.

fck you guys europeanfags are human too

Dose this mean we will wake up and Obama will be president?

If you look at the exponential growth in computing power and in computer generated worlds/ simulations have come in the past 20 or so years and project that into the future, its easy to come to the conclusion that eventually we will be able to simulate entire universes easily.

If the number of universes that could be simulated by a technologically advanced civilization is infinite, what is the possibility that you are living in the single real reality?

Since the only truth we know is that "I think, therefor i am", for all you know you are some future aristocrat simulating his greatxgreat100 grandpa in the exciting times of the 21st century.

"I think therefor i am" is irrelevant in the context of artificial intelligence

why?

>"simulation" and shit

dont talk like a junglebunny, Sup Forums holds itself to a higher standard

Because artificial intelligence will inevitably one day be advanced enough to think for itself

Just because it can think for itself dose not make it real

well yeah. And thus based on the "I think, therefor i am" idea, AI will be just as "real" as we are.

Exactly

ok sorry im new
>so dont use kekistan flag
>dont use european flag unless you want to be called fag
>and be more specific about stuff I want to talk about?

i don;t see how it's irrelevant then. It's more relevant than ever.

Yea you and every other drone thinks this

dont just say "exactly", like thats what youve been saying the whole time.

Your original post is the only thing that's irrelevant.

you fucking nonce

The statement is not irreverent but the idea is

It was a joke...maybe

A sneaky way for atheists to get tricked into believing in a creator like the retarded plebs they are. Just tell them this is gods simulation and watch them recoil.

Why?

The question is why are we in it? and what happens when "our part" is over? Is there another simulation?

so Sup Forums is full of creationists?

Dude im not getting into deep philosophical loop with you on this

>simulate entire universes easily
A computation requires a physical mechanism to carry it out, and this mechanism is necessarily more complex than the data it contains. Therefore, the entire contents of our universe converted into fully optimized computation and storage media would be a long ways from being able to run a simulation of itself. Similarly, a full-physics simulation of something simple enough to actually run would be slower than the physics that the computer itself is using to perform the computation. The fundamental limits of computation are quite a bit more than what has been built in reality, but no civilization no matter how advanced would be able to run even one full-resolution simulation of itself, let alone infinite entire universes.

>replying to the Leaf

Really?

You should lurk for a MINIMUM of 6 months before posting here. You're not gonna last long, I can tell.

The belief is that it is incredibly likely that we are living in a computer simulation.

We're already able to make realistic computer simulations of real world physics. Once we have computers fast enough to handle on a much larger scale, we could potentially simulate our own universe (or something similar). We could simulate it nearly an infinite number of times, as well. And in each of those simulations, there would eventually be other simulations within the simulation.

When this is taken into account, it becomes incredibly unlikely that we are living in the "true" reality.

So "God" is probably just some dude who started our simulation.

wait so you guys dont replly to eurofags and canadians? canadians seems cool

WHAT AN ASSHOLE I SERIOUSLY HOPE WHOEVER BUILT THIS PLACE IS BURNING IN ETERNAL HELL

Dilation, not working to scale, limiting the size of the simulation, etc. all for this to work.

unless the real universe was bigger than this simulated one.

Checkmate atheist.

I lurked Sup Forums a lot just like any other normalfag some rekthreads and so on. But I saw some cool youtube vinds about /po/ and you guys seems like fun

>make nonsense statement
>some asks you why you said that
>NOD GEDDIN INTO A DEEB PHILOSOPHAL DEBADE WID YOU
a true burger

It started out as a red herring thought experiment to occupy your mind and waste your time and demoralize you so you'd spend less time researching and spreading hillary and dnc crimes. Sup Forums being filled with baitable redditors, they swallowed it hook line and sinker, and it's never once been deleted or moved to /x/ because this place is trash and nobody gases and perorts like they should

So you just want your unsupported assertion here to stand unchallenged. Well, you can either justify your statement, apologize and admit you were just spouting off on something you don't actually understand, or continue trying to weasel out of the previous options and end up looking like an asshole instead of just a fool.

"I think therefor i am" is not relevant just because you think dose not mean you are a physical existing force. You may just be programed to believe you are.

bitch I've been here for years and never lurked, my 1st day on pol i was starting shit in threads

>just because you think dose not mean you are a physical existing force
eh.. that's not what it means. It just means you think, therefor you exist.

Its fucking common sense. Just because you can think dose not mean you are real

Still wouldn't allow infinite universes, even of arbitrary simplicity. And that makes a very big difference in probability analysis.

You exist in what context? your reality? how do you know that's real? What is existence? (This is what i meant about "philosophical loop")

>Things that think aren't real, because the aren't
t. a burger

Unverifiable(to the general public) meta logic posited by supposed (((quantum scientists))) to tell rational, atheistic whites that their lives are meaningless.
Be a good boy and never question scientists dear, they know more than you ok :)))

The only acceptable flags are geo, jihadi, gay, lolbertarian and confederate

Simulation theory is something whites like Elon Musk came up with to deal with the white guilt they've been indoctrinated to for their success and to cognitively dissociate from the reality that their success came because of their connections and value to Jews.

In the context of myself. I'm the primary axiom of stating that things exist.

We only interpret things to be real if they are part of our reality, and our reality is only considered real because we are consciously able to observe it. Everything requires conscious awareness to be considered real. Hard to have a conversation about things existing when you say that we ourselves as thinking beings don't exist.

>"philosophical loop"
It's just a question. There's no loop

Roko's basilisk

>Roko's basilisk

Roko's basilisk

>Roko's basilisk

So you don't understand the cogito, which isn't surprising. Here's a brief rundown:

Dude named Descartes wanted to build a foundation for beliefs that could be known to be true beyond pesky considerations of doubt and uncertainty. So he set about questioning his current beliefs, and disregarding anything that admitted even the slightest possibility of doubt even if the metaphysics of the universe were set up to deceive him (a Matrix scenario). He eventually concluded that the only thing he couldn't doubt was the fact of his own existence, since by pondering the question, there had to be a mind to ponder it, whatever the particular details of the embodiment of that mind may be. The usual English translation of this is "I think, therefore I am", since you can be confident of your own existence in a way that you can't be confident about the existence of anything else. So not only is it unrelated to artificial intelligence (or any intelligences that aren't YOU), it applies equally as validly whether you're a human, alien, or artificial intelligence.

Just because you view reality as what you can observe dose not mean you are not artificial in nature