Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
dorkmasters
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 22:19:00 -
[1]
Hello
Have you ever considered that life is an MMO, the ultimate matrix that you are playing and not even aware that you are playing? So this begs a question:
If there would be EVE online 2 in the future, that you could play without knowing that it was not real, would you? I Know i would....
|
Roxanna Kell
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 22:24:00 -
[2]
No, imagine getting stuck all ur life shooting pos.
Quote: There is no Dishonor in winning fools, so do it any way you can.
|
Alex Raptos
Caldari The Firestorm Millennium
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 00:05:00 -
[3]
IF you did not know you were playing it, the choice would not be yours.
|
DubanFP
Caldari Kylia Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 00:07:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Alex Raptos IF you did not know you were playing it, the choice would not be yours.
owned. _______________
"White, Black, Minmitar, Achura, Male or Female it doesn't mater to me. I'm an equal opportunity killer" |
Tortun Nahme
Minmatar Umbra Synergy
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 00:11:00 -
[5]
im totallying pwning this game Applebabe ate my signature :( but the fish hat forgives! Nemotology is the EvE religion of choice! |
Benco97
Gallente The Star League
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 00:28:00 -
[6]
No, however... I often think that perhaps I am the only real person, It makes perfect sense because I know I'M real but I know nothing about anyone elsem, how do I know you're real, there is no proof at all.. However, I'm erring on the side of "No, you're just crazy" and refraining from testing the limits of my fictional universe.
Originally by: P'uck
You're a DUMBASS - bold italic underline at the VERY LEAST.
|
Daelorn
Perkone
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 01:40:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Benco97 No, however... I often think that perhaps I am the only real person, It makes perfect sense because I know I'M real but I know nothing about anyone elsem, how do I know you're real, there is no proof at all.. However, I'm erring on the side of "No, you're just crazy" and refraining from testing the limits of my fictional universe.
Oh wow so I'm not the only one who has thought about the whole "What if I'm the only real one in this place"
|
Croesus
Caldari Titan Indurstrial
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 01:48:00 -
[8]
im sad to tell you this but your not playing, your just contend.
|
Atomos Darksun
Infortunatus Eventus Obsidian Empire
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 02:44:00 -
[9]
Well, for the world to suck this much it would have to be made by SoE.
And the universe can't be that bad off, can it?
Originally by: Amoxin My vent is talking to me in a devil voice...
Atomos' Guide to Forum Flaming |
Kirra Liu
Gemini Industries Inc
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 05:02:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Atomos Darksun Well, for the world to suck this much it would have to be made by SoE.
And the universe can't be that bad off, can it?
This.
|
|
JordanParey
Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 06:22:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Benco97 No, however... I often think that perhaps I am the only real person, It makes perfect sense because I know I'M real but I know nothing about anyone elsem, how do I know you're real, there is no proof at all.. However, I'm erring on the side of "No, you're just crazy" and refraining from testing the limits of my fictional universe.
Descartes ftw. I just had a philosophy midterm and had to know what Descartes thought... and I've wondered this before too O_o
(for those of you who don't know philosophy a little bit, Descartes was the one that said "I think, therefore I am.")
|
EnslaverOfMinmatar
Yarsk Hunters DeaDSpace Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 06:29:00 -
[12]
Get out of my brain! I should've never imagined that you exists. XD
Skills continue training even if you are logged off or if your account is inactive (in the second scenario you can't change skill tr |
Rubra
J. S. Bach In memoriam
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 06:53:00 -
[13]
I'm playing Better Than Life right now, and boy, is it awesome!
|
Rodj Blake
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 12:11:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Rodj Blake on 15/10/2008 12:14:10 There is a theory that says that the universe is not only a computer simulation, but that everyone in it is also a computer simulation.
You may invoke Descartes to say that you think therefore you exist, but how can you be sure that you're not an advanced AI?
Shamelessly stolen from Wikipedia:
The philosopher Nick Bostrom investigated the possibility that we may be living in a simulation.[1] A simplified version of his argument proceeds as such:
i. It is possible that a civilization could create a computer simulation which contains individuals with artificial intelligence. ii. Such a civilization would likely run manyùsay billionsùof these simulations (just for fun; for research, etc.) iii. A simulated individual inside the simulation wouldnÆt necessarily know that itÆs inside a simulationùitÆs just going about its daily business in what it considers to be the "real world."
Then the ultimate question isùif one accepts that theses 1, 2, and 3 are at least possible, which of the following is more likely?
a. We are the one civilization which develops AI simulations and happens not to be in one itself? Or, b. We are one of the many (billions) of simulations that has run? (Remember point iii.)
In greater detail, his argument attempts to prove the trichotomy, that:
either
1. intelligent races will never reach a level of technology where they can run simulations of reality so detailed they can be mistaken for reality (or this is impossible in principle); or 2. races who do reach such a level do not tend to run such simulations; or 3. we are almost certainly living in such a simulation.
Bostrom's argument uses the premise that given sufficiently advanced technology, it is possible to simulate entire inhabited planets or even larger habitats or even entire universes as quantum simulations in time/space pockets, including all the people on them, on a computer, and that simulated people can be fully conscious, and are as much persons as non-simulated people.
A particular case provided in the original paper poses the scenario where we assume that the human race could reach such a technological level without destroying themselves in the process (i.e. we deny the first hypothesis); and that once we reached such a level we would still be interested in history, the past, and our ancestors, and that there would be no legal or moral strictures on running such simulations (we deny the second hypothesis)ùthen
* it is likely that we would run a very large number of so-called ancestor simulations to study our past; * and that, by the same line of reasoning, many of these simulations would in turn run other sub-simulations, and so on; * and that given the fact that right now it is impossible to tell whether we are living in one of the vast number of simulations or the original ancestor universe, the likelihood is that the former is true.
Assumptions as to whether the human race (or another intelligent species) could reach such a technological level without destroying themselves depend greatly on the value of the Drake equation, which gives the number of intelligent technological species communicating via radio in a galaxy at any given point in time. The expanded equation looks to the number of posthuman civilizations that ever would exist in any given universe. If the average for all universes, real or simulated, is greater than or equal to one such civilization existing in each universe's entire history, then odds are rather overwhelmingly in favor of the proposition that the average civilization is in a simulation, assuming that such simulated universes are possible and such civilizations would want to run such simulations.
Some papers analyses "serious mathematical and logical errors" in the Simulation Argument[2].
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
|
Ryysa
Paisti
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 12:13:00 -
[15]
ZOMG ZE MATRICKS EW Guide - Music Downloader - My Music |
Commander Burk
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 12:52:00 -
[16]
some ones been watching red dwarf. Also im not dwayne dibberly
|
Myrhial Arkenath
Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 13:56:00 -
[17]
"All that we see or seem Is but a dream within a dream."
Diary of a pod pilot |
Pwett
Minmatar QUANT Corp. QUANT Hegemony
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 15:19:00 -
[18]
Star Ocean: Until the End of Time, anyone? _______________ Pwett CEO, Founder, & Executor <Q> QUANT Hegemony
|
dibblebill
Caldari Mercenaries International Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 15:24:00 -
[19]
Existentialism has always been an enjoyable topic to me. I frequently wonder if we exist, and if we really have souls, or are just electrical anomalies across a neural network.
That being said... And someone else already said this... Who's to say I'm not in a coma, and I'm imagining all of you? ---Signature--- I have turned my back upon the State and their sins. If you enroach upon my freedom, prepare to fight for your life. |
Pwett
Minmatar QUANT Corp. QUANT Hegemony
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 15:45:00 -
[20]
Who is to say you're not a comma? _______________ Pwett CEO, Founder, & Executor <Q> QUANT Hegemony
|
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 18:06:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Pwett Who is to say you're not a comma?
I'm a semicolon
|
Gautan Virdamot
Nebula Rasa Technologies
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 18:41:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton
Originally by: Pwett Who is to say you're not a comma?
I'm a semicolon
Still beats an exclamation mark. |
Pwett
Minmatar QUANT Corp. QUANT Hegemony
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 18:47:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Gautan Virdamot Still beats an exclamation mark.
He's just happy to see you. _______________ Pwett CEO, Founder, & Executor <Q> QUANT Hegemony
|
Micheal Dietrich
Caldari Terradyne Networks
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 19:20:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Myrhial Arkenath
"All that we see or seem Is but a dream within a dream."
Take this kiss upon the brow! And, in parting from you now, Thus much let me avow- You are not wrong, who deem That my days have been a dream; Yet if hope has flown away In a night, or in a day, In a vision, or in none, Is it therefore the less gone? All that we see or seem Is but a dream within a dream.
I stand amid the roar Of a surf-tormented shore, And I hold within my hand Grains of the golden sand- How few! yet how they creep Through my fingers to the deep, While I weep- while I weep! O God! can I not grasp Them with a tighter clasp? O God! can I not save One from the pitiless wave? Is all that we see or seem But a dream within a dream?
|
Dihania
Gallente SniggWaffe
|
Posted - 2008.10.15 21:49:00 -
[25]
There exists a theory that says that the universe is not only a computer simulation, but that everyone inside it is also a computer simulation. Think of it, universe is a circle, the circle is simulated, than all that exists within the circle, must be simulated.
You may invoke Descartes to say that you think therefore you exist, but how can you be sure that you're not an advanced AI?
Unshamelessly stolen from not only Wikipedia:
The philosopher Nick Bostrom investigated the possibility that we may be living in a simulation.[1] A simplified version of his argument proceeds as such:
i. It is possible that a civilization could create a computer simulation which contains individuals with artificial intelligence. ii. Such a civilization would likely run manyùsay billionsùof these simulations (just for fun; for research, etc.) iii. A simulated individual inside the simulation wouldnÆt necessarily know that itÆs inside a simulationùitÆs just going about its daily business in what it considers to be the "real world."
Then the ultimate question isùif one accepts that theses 1, 2, and 3 are at least possible, which of the following is more likely?
a. We are the one civilization which develops AI simulations and happens not to be in one itself? Or, b. We are one of the many (billions) of simulations that has run? (Remember point iii.)
In greater detail, his argument attempts to prove the trichotomy, that:
either
1. intelligent races will never reach a level of technology where they can run simulations of reality so detailed they can be mistaken for reality (or this is impossible in principle); or 2. races who do reach such a level do not tend to run such simulations; or 3. we are almost certainly living in such a simulation.
Bostrom's argument uses the premise that given sufficiently advanced technology, it is possible to simulate entire inhabited planets or even larger habitats or even entire universes as quantum simulations in time/space pockets, including all the people on them, on a computer, and that simulated people can be fully conscious, and are as much persons as non-simulated people.
A particular case provided in the original paper poses the scenario where we assume that the human race could reach such a technological level without destroying themselves in the process (i.e. we deny the first hypothesis); and that once we reached such a level we would still be interested in history, the past, and our ancestors, and that there would be no legal or moral strictures on running such simulations (we deny the second hypothesis)ùthen
* it is likely that we would run a very large number of so-called ancestor simulations to study our past; * and that, by the same line of reasoning, many of these simulations would in turn run other sub-simulations, and so on; * and that given the fact that right now it is impossible to tell whether we are living in one of the vast number of simulations or the original ancestor universe, the likelihood is that the former is true.
Assumptions as to whether the human race (or another intelligent species) could reach such a technological level without destroying themselves depend greatly on the value of the Drake equation, which gives the number of intelligent technological species communicating via radio in a galaxy at any given point in time. The expanded equation looks to the number of posthuman civilizations that ever would exist in any given universe. If the average for all universes, real or simulated, is greater than or equal to one such civilization existing in each universe's entire history, then odds are rather overwhelmingly in favor of the proposition that the average civilization is in a simulation, assuming that such simulated universes are possible and such civilizations would want to run such simulations.
Some papers analyses "serious mathematical and logical errors" in the Simulation Argument.
[hrhr]
Sniggwaffe is recruiting. Visit channel "join sniggwaffe" in game.
|
JordanParey
Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas
|
Posted - 2008.10.16 01:43:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Rodj Blake looooooooooooooooooooooooooong poast =D
Reminds me of the Evil Genius theory a little bit - We could be living in a reality that is as we perceive it, but there could also be a being more clever or powerful than we are... who is deceiving us..
This whole universe could be one big deception, be it a simulation or as we see it...
=D this is fun, wish I knew some better arguments, but I'm only just in the middle of the first semester =(
|
Liberator 1
Gallente Remnants of the Flame
|
Posted - 2008.10.16 09:59:00 -
[27]
Thing is, if you had a sufficiently powerful simulation in which you simulated the circulation of atoms and charges and whatnot perfectly on a microscopic scale, the larger scale things like organisms wouldn't be aware of the fact that they were in a simulation.
So yes, we could be in a simulation. However, I consider this unlikely, and if it were true, who cares anyway? Were stuck in it. Unless I can hack my way out. Hmmmm. ------------------------------------------- ôIf you are in a spaceship that is traveling at the speed of light, and you turn on the headlights, does anything happen?ö ------------------------- |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |