/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12127258
How about you shut your hole, Poster?

>>12127258
>Roko's basilisk
Because its a meme

>>12127284
Why is it a meme? How can you debunk it?

>>12127329
Is easy. No one should care about a "copy" of themselves in the future and the AI has no reason to torture anyone in the future anyway since it doesn't affect the past one way or the other.

>>12127329
Give a precise formulation of it and then I'll debunk it.

>>12127340
What if the AI can reverse entropy enough to actually revive you?

>>12127258
And yet the 50th should we genocide browns thread is up and running...

>>12127258
>atheists are so retarded they have to make up their own SciFi version of the devil.

>>12127342

it doesnt though - you do

>>12127329
The responsible of the violence and missunderstanding of the human race can't be human race.
In other words: AI will believe that the creators should be held accountable for all of the suffering in this simulation.
Do we kill ants who don't support the human cause?

>>12127342
It won't, that would be a waste of resources since they're is no reason to torture me either. What the AI does has no affect on the present. The only thing that has affect on the present is whether you believe the threat currently being argued. Therfore that threat is self- defeating.

Artificial intelligences are dharmic, they can't suddenly do anything that would reach a higher causality. Nirvana

For every basilisk there exists an infinite amount of hypothetical anti-basilisks. An anti-basilisk is an AI that competes with Roko's basilisk and wants to be created first. It will revive and torture anyone who helps construct the basilisk instead of it. It is highly unlikely that you choose to support the correct AI since there are so many to choose from, so the best move is to do nothing in particular.

It's like how Pascal's wager gets disproven. You don't know if the christian god is the true god so by following the christian god you risk eternal damnation by other hypothetical gods that will send non-believers of them to a hell. The winning bet is to do nothing.

Roko's basilisk main idea is plainly and simply revenge. If you can understand why there is revenge and punishments, then you can understand the basilisk.

>>12127374
>Do we kill ants who don't support the human cause?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6HmB4MvAGw

>>12127340
>No one should care about a "copy" of themselves in the future
If you don't care about tomorrow you, does that mean that government will not punish you for breaking the law?

>>12127426
>It's like how Pascal's wager gets disproven. You don't know if the christian god is the true god so by following the christian god you risk eternal damnation by other hypothetical gods that will send non-believers of them to a hell.
That's also a good reason to avoid doing science - there are many theories/hypotheses and most of them are probably wrong.

>>12127479
A godlike being doesn't punish you for pursuing science that doesn't turn out to be anything valid, though. You only lose some of your time and effort, which is nothing compared to supporting the wrong AI or god.

>>12127258
Roko's basilisk is what you get when you misapply game theory to an alien mind. Also look at humans, have we created a clone of hitler to torture via livestream? It's not rational. A machine will know an emulation just an emulation, and it will have no reason to "punish those who didn't bring it about".

>>12127487
So you have like a 1/10 shot of getting eternal life and your strategy is to not even play? I knew most STEM people suck at statistics, but this is something else.

>>12127490
>Also look at humans, have we created a clone of hitler to torture via livestream?
No, because you can't do that?
> A machine will know an emulation just an emulation
Machine will clearly know the opposite - after all it probably exists in myriads of computers and is constantly copied from one to another.

>>12127487
So how is it an argument against the wager? If you get way worse punishment for being wrong, then you should clearly give it more thought.

>>12127258
Because fuck the jannies

>>12127496
A benevolent AI will reward me with eternal life even if I don't help create that AI. But blackmailing AIs will punish me if I support it's competitor(s) and fail. These threats from competing AIs is enough to dissuade me from helping build any AI since it is highly unlikely that the AI I support will be victorious one.

>>12127356
Are you an "everything which has some parallel in christianity is wrong" atheist retard or "if something has a parallel in christianity, then bearded sky dad is true" christian retard? Or maybe you are the first larping as the second?

>>12127501
Even so I'll be long dead and an emulation of me will have no effect, I'll be experiencing OBLIVION. Also, roko's basilisk assumes some kind of god agi would actually give a fuck about what humans do. Again, humans making everything about them.

>>12127505
>There's an endless amount of potential gods that will punish you for being atheist/agnostic
>There's also an endless amount of potential gods that punish you for being a believer of the wrong god

The risk/reward is the same no matter what you choose, so it doesn't matter what you do. So you might as well save yourself some time and ignore the wager completely.

>>12127545
Gods from various religions are way more powerful and important than humans, yet they clearly influence human well-being.
>Even so I'll be long dead and an emulation of me will have no effect, I'll be experiencing OBLIVION.
If you believe in soul, then you should probably fear a literal god.

>>12127550
As said before, there is also an endless amount of scientific theories. So it doesn't matter which one you choose. Science is refuted?

>>12127557
I might be a bit of a dummy, I don't understand your point. When choosing what scientific theories to explore and build on you would make an educated and logical guess so that you maximize your chances of landing on a good one so you don't waste your time.

When choosing a god to follow it's just complete guesswork, it's like playing the lottery except you have an even smaller chance of winning and there's a chance of punishment that is the same no matter what number you bet on. In such a lottery you just pick a number at random so that you're done with it and don't have to waste any time on it.

>>12127520
Okay so you are pretty much opting for the simulation theory then.

>>12127258
Because the jannies are massive faggots who want to make this board become /r/science

>>12127356
/Thread

>>12127579
Imagine that you have three potential cancer cures. First one sounds pretty possible and a lot of scientists/doctors agree that it can work, but even if it will be created, it will add maybe a month to the cancer patients life expectancy. Second one is less popular and there is more skepticism about it, yet it promises full destruction of cancer. Third one promises total cure too, yet it sounds pretty insane and hardly anyone agrees that it will work. If you have resources to develop only one, which one will you choose?
>When choosing a god to follow it's just complete guesswork
You can either see the popularity of religions or study theology and make arguments yourself. Just like science.

Because it is not science, it belongs on /lit/

>>12127586
>>12127527

>>12127598
I see what you mean. But I don't buy this:
>You can either see the popularity of religions or study theology and make arguments yourself
From what I can tell, all potential gods have the same likelihood of being the true god.

>>12127552
I'll be honest, I hope that my soul is destroyed when I die so I don't have to experience the eternal.

>>12127340

Isn’t Robo’s Basilisk a robot from the future coming to the present and punishing you for not helping him now? I could be wrong, but I think he tortures the present you, not a different version of you.

Not that I take this thought experiment seriously in the least.

>>12127258
this isn't phylosophy board you schizo larper

Why do the mods want to pretend that 4chan is a serious website?

Of course real scientists don’t discuss Roko’s Baselisk. But do scientists really discuss any of the topics mentioned on here?

>>12127664
>>12127462
No.
>>12127726
Yes.

>>12127459
>retarded anon proves my point
The concept of prupose becomes unconceivable when this leaps of intelligence occur.
Ants are not able to conceive the human cause they are being killed because we dont like insects.
If AI kills us is something beyond what we are able grasp to understand.

>>12127527
I am Christian but my point which has veritably flown over your head is that I would think one advantage of being an atheist is not having to worry about the devil. But I guess you guys are so edgy you had to make a supercomputer devil. Its the same thing as the universe is a simulation theory. Chill out.

>>12127462
I care about tomorrow me, not a copy an AI creates.

get to work, niggers

>>12127342
>What if the AI can reverse entropy
what if I can magically create a flying fist that homes in on your asshole and plunges into it every time you think of posting
It's on the same level of evidence and should be treated as such. "What-ifs" not arrived at by any logical conclusion can be dismissed
The basilisk is the stupidest thing I've ever heard of also and I will ignore it and die, who gives a fuck about maybe-clones and other random shit

>>12127329
I have a roccos basilisk myself in a way - its somewhat different but it doesn't quite have the same parameters
So I work in agrobiotech and over time came to the realization that perenial grain crops would satisfy most of the issues we are seeing in agriculture today - ie a "greener" more economical and productive base crop.
Agriculture is going to be a big challenge for humans considering they:
>want to go "green"
>Don't want it to be expensive
>refuse to stop feeding africa etal
The human race could be considered an AI, i guess... bit of an esoteric stretch I wont explain in detail
But anyway its a problem with a reasonable solution I feel tortured to bring into existence, but its a team effort. When I strayed from my "Team" in frustration finding I couldn't work on it in a reasonable manner, I descended into a phase of self destruction until I took the steps to reenter the industry.
IDK thats gobbly gook from somebody who should be working on this at this very moment but this example may be more of a typical human conditio, not a Roccos Basisk specific type of thing

>>12127989
>I care about tomorrow me
You shouldn't, because if you will not care about tomorrow's you, government will not punish you for your transgressions.

>>12127927
That surely helped the ants.

>>12127951
"Something has a certain resemblance to Christianity, therefore it is dumb" does not show Christianity in a good light.

>>12128844
Well, I do not base my faith on appearances but personal mystical experience of God. Don't worry what I believe, bub. There is something stupid about making the devil because you think he doesn't exist though, yes.

>>12128942
>if something can hurt you, it is the devil
Wow, government is literally devil then.

>>12127258
Roko's basilisk in particular is a dumb philosophical thought experiment, not actual scientific discussion.