We are living in a simulation after all :)
Okay, Shami, I think looks like you have one. That the famous argument we were having about do we live in a simulation? Somebody has proven that we do. Here is a link to the article. I would love to hear your thoughts on it. The article is definitely worth. I read the proof is basically relying on the argument that since we have consciousness that sells no evolutionary purpose, which I kind of question that part of the premise. But let's go on with that
Sudha Varadarajan
@sudha · 0:06
Hey, hey, hey. I have been telling you this for the last 20 years. Where is that acknowledgment
But if you heard Maeswell, you know that I don't buy this argument. I think there's a flaw in that argument. And therefore I was inviting Xiaomi's comments on point of view to debate that with him. If you're welcome to share your thoughts too, read the article and let me know if you buy into this particular proof of it. So I still stand in my firm real physical world ground and I'm convinced that's all there is to it
Shammi Mohamed
@shammi · 4:54
That took, I mean, maybe minutes per frame or something like that. Right. Yet that frame equated to 120 fourth of a second. So the whole premise that the time perception in this simulation or the time progression in this simulation is tied to the compute medium is wrong. I feel like our simulation has probably if you want to boil it down, dig deeper, go deeper than deeper
Shammi Mohamed
@shammi · 4:24
It's very likely that the overlaws who run our simulation within their simulation are really looking for a very powerful intelligent compute unit that they can use to solve their problems. And the best way to cultivate one of those is to start with a simulation in complete random state and inject in more random state from time to time into it and just run the simulation super fast to actually let the information coils and evolve and eventually evolve into a very smart conscious unit
Shammi Mohamed
@shammi · 2:55
And I believe that could also be the case, because over the last few weeks, I have been playing with a simulator of conveyors game of life, and I have been utterly fascinated. Not only can you start it with any state you want and run the simulation, which then makes it super deterministic. But while the simulation is running, you can poke in and introduce new elements or new state. You can inject a new state that can vary the outcomes drastically
I know you've said this in the past, and so many people online believe in this as well. Which is that we we we we we we we are living in a simulation being the case is very high, but my objection to that is that yes, if we we we we we we we are living in a we we we are living in a simulation. That's pretty much what it amounts down to, because if you're not, then none of those properties come into play
Shammi Mohamed
@shammi · 4:40
Hey, Arish, thank you very much for your response. I really enjoyed listening to it. I think from what you say, it looks like both of us are looking at this through very similar lengths, especially how evolution kind of fits into this simulation. That is our universe. So to answer your question, what is my belief? For quite a number of years, I have been prescribing to agnosticism be it scientific or spiritual, and that's where my belief is
Do we take different action based on which of these beliefs or whatever, which of these theories or which of these world views are correct? Right. And in most of our day to day life, maybe it doesn't really make a difference, right. But if you think about the one fundamental difference in the two scenarios is, as you said, there's a purpose to the simulation
Shammi Mohamed
@shammi · 4:55
And from an evolutionary standpoint, where we look at it from is that there was a big bang where we had a lot of compressed matter in one pinpoint that really exploded. And then from all the chaos that ensued, things began to coalesce. And that's how evolution gets kicked off. I'm talking about evolution of information, of course, whether it's star systems, galaxies, planets, and then within planets
Shammi Mohamed
@shammi · 5:00
So based on that, I feel like if we we are living in a simulation, anything or there could be a purpose, the purpose. And I'm really trying to figure out what that purpose is at the macro level, of just looking at the trajectory of of which way the evolution is going and what we have at hand at least. But then I guess maybe my view is far too my opaque just from humankind and Earth's point what is happening at Earth
Shammi Mohamed
@shammi · 4:38
And the reason for that is the human is AGI artificial general intelligence and the human packs in, I guess, years, decades of experience neural network training not just a specific domain, but like in a very generic overall domain. And it also helps that the human neural network is the product of millions of years of evolution, of how it is topologically laid out. And that to me, is the answer because what we need is an AGI
Shammi Mohamed
@shammi · 4:03
Honestly, I know it makes a lot of people comfortable, but I'd be up for it because I'm tired of my 40 year warranty where I have to put on my reading glasses or 50 year warranty going off where I have to continue to take cholesterol medications. But anyways, that aside, once that happens, our purpose is going to be completely different. Right? Hopefully we can use this AI
Purpose is an illusion Shammi. I think that's a fundamental difference between how you look at the world and how I look at the world. But this was an invigorating conversation I really enjoyed. I listened to everything you have to say, and I think we should do a couple of things. One thing that stuck out, one statement you made about AGI and Sentience going together almost. And once you have Ali, you'll have some level of consciousness as well
Sontaia Briggs
@PKBriggs · 2:07
Hi, Arish. I saw this swell and I was a attracted to the title and then I saw the article and it took me a while to read article full disclosure. It got a bit dense for me, so I just had to begin to use my graduate skills and just skim and get to the bottom. But this question is very interesting to me, and it just keeps coming up and up, over and over again. And I had to just sort of write my thoughts out
Swell Team
@Swell · 0:15
Hi, sontaia. Thank you so much for chiming in and sharing your thoughts on this topic. Really enjoyed listening to them. I wanted to reply to you and talk about two things you brought up. One, you said that it it's not possible to know whether we are living in real world or in a simulation, and therefore the discussion is almost mood or academic
Sontaia Briggs
@PKBriggs · 3:13
Because what is it based on it's based on nothing. And then, like you said, I guess whoever this architect is that created a simulation, what would be the point of making it super obvious? I guess that being like the quality. I think that's what they were talking about in the article. So the nature of life has so much quality or quality to it or all these little nuances that it has to be real. But also you watch these different kind of AI movies
It was more about individuals, people who are really curious about this thing, how they choose to come to a point of view on the world and what they decide to do. Even right now, you don't have to think about the simulation hypothesis, even right now, anybody who is in 80s is a sizeable population. That does not mean the 8th of this world are going around committing crimes or just living very hedonistically or whatever because they feel there is no consequence or no afterlife to worry about
Hello. It's so funny, because right now all of my swells are relating exactly to what I was recently hearing about, and I know it's right now technically on my for you page. So it's all my info interests, but it's just crazy how similar it can be to what I was just listening to
Shashank Shekhar
@sshekhar · 4:48
So understanding is even further removed, considering we can't even perceive certain intelligences that exist in this universe. So regardless, I kind of fall in Irish's campaign here that I don't know if there is a purpose, because any purpose that we attribute to the existence is our own creation. The creation itself doesn't seem like it has a purpose, that's one coming to evolution
Shashank Shekhar
@sshekhar · 2:51
Or maybe I heard it in a lecture. I think it's from Lao TSU's whatever book Tao taking and his assertion is the first time someone observed beauty in this universe is when Ugliness was born. It seems very counterintuitive, but I think he has a point, right? Until we saw something and observed something and labeled it as beautiful, whether it was a beautiful sunset or a rose flower or whatever
Hey, Shashank, I really enjoy this into your sold above. I think the fundamental level is on. We can choose to add our own labels on top of it. We can choose to make ourselves miserable or of experiences on top of whatever experiences we have. So yeah, I think that makes a lot of sense. What I was really struck by was this comment about is anything evolving after all?
Shammi Mohamed
@shammi · 4:45
I think evolution is, in your words, the label that we give to this progress and the progress of what the progress of what we perspective as organization of matter to reach entropy. That kind of represents information, and it facilitates the storage of this information and meaningful information and also its replication. I know that's a long winded definition, but it is what I could come up with because I have always contended throughout this discussion that when we talk about evolution, we are not talking about evolution of life
Shammi Mohamed
@shammi · 4:52
But over the course of evolution, it doesn't stop there because all of us have some good processing plants in our heads. All of the mammals, also, I would say, and over the course of time, we have taken advantage of social structures, and our purpose is a little different in order to we have the secondary purposes or secondary goals that contribute back to the primary purposes, right to really increase your life and really to procreate
Shammi Mohamed
@shammi · 0:57
And as promised, I'm going to paste a link to the Talk It's by Christopher Finding Life. We can't imagine that's it let me know what you guys think after seeing this video
The example sir gave us mostly that if everyone is, but if everyone is intelligent, then there will be no one dumb or ugly. So in the future there will be no need of degrees or knowledge because everyone possesses the same knowledge
Hello. I can be completely wrong, but your knowledge, your intelligence was fascinating for me. I heard the whole thing. I liked it. Thank you for increasing my knowledge and nothing much that helped me out with this question
Hello, I am Saniti Chaudhri. So first of all, thank you, Arish Arish, for following me and becoming my first follower. And Secondly, about the stimulation you all were talking about. I heard everything overnight, I came to a conclusion that stimulations are just some code written from the universe for us. But the codes can be changed with the help of our perspective of ours lives or the decisions we take daily. So each and every decision sets a code or a path for us
Shammi Mohamed
@shammi · 4:44
Currently, our interfaces to it are a little rudimentary because there are very clear boundaries between the smartphone and your biological body. When those barriers break down, it'll be a very different thing. And to directly answer what will intelligence be if you don't have something to compare it against, that means we would have transcended to the next level of information state. Right? We'll be collective usually compared to the peer of the collective
Shammi Mohamed
@shammi · 4:54
And the way we solve that in today's neural networks is by actually taking the output and feeding that back to multiple layers in the neural network with the whole idea that a lot more weight is given to outcomes that don't match previous outcomes. So this is basically historic