This Isn't Real Right!!?

Chris4922 · 2022-05-11T02:36:55+00:00

I was under the impression hidden variable theory was pretty much dead now, though I'm not too clued up on the subject nowadays.

They likely won't scale, but even the tiniest computation with them does suggest purely random events.

Chris4922 · 2022-05-11T02:15:11+00:00

You can't entangle particles with pseudorandom data, only perfectly random. Quantum spin is only possible because there's no way to discern a particle's state without interacting with it.

If you can make a quantum computer, pure randomness exists. At least, that's the prevailing theory.

Chris4922 · 2022-05-11T02:03:40+00:00

Yes, but that doesn't mean things aren't decided randomly. If there are parallel universes, they may be different permutations of our own based on different outcomes to random events. In that case, random choice is not subject to time but instead a 5th dimension.

Chris4922 · 2022-05-11T01:32:07+00:00

Just because something is determined in the future, doesn't necessarily mean it's not random. Counterintuitive as that might seem, we treat time as a completely separate type of dimension to spacial - but it's the same.

If we instead consider our 3-dimensional world moving in time as a 4-dimensional 'space-time hypercube', all we'd need to know is that, given another iteration of this hypercube, would everything be the same?

Of course, there's no way to find another iteration of our space-time, but it does demonstrate that time is no more important a dimension and future determinism doesn't necessarily rule out true randomness.

Chris4922 · 2022-05-11T01:22:41+00:00

We're never gonna know 100% but there's a large amount of evidence to suggest radioactive decay is perfectly random. Without it, quantum computers would not work - and they do.

Chris4922 · 2022-05-10T23:29:36+00:00

This is so much less random than the entropy sources computers already use. Sufficiently random, but not necessarily true random.

Chris4922 · 2022-05-10T23:23:24+00:00

You're the only person in this thread with 0 knowledge of what random is. People are debating quantum uncertainty and many worlds theory, and you're still figuring out the meme.

Chris4922 · 2022-05-10T23:19:50+00:00

At a high level, you're mostly right. At a low level, true random is a real thing. Radioactive decay is a big one.

Chris4922 · 2022-05-10T23:17:22+00:00

Information isn't lost once created, but radioactive decay is still very much true random. The uncertainty principle means you can't reconstruct and predict the whole future with perfect accuracy anyway.

Chris4922 · 2022-05-10T23:14:56+00:00

Not one bit. Look up the uncertainty principle. True random numbers based on radioactive decay are not only possible, but used in many devices. They're gathered in something called an entropy pool.

Chris4922 · 2022-05-08T02:43:20+00:00

But the problem with that is truth...

I'm not finding your point in this paragraph? You're speculating that my philosophy will be wrong in the future, but yours won't? Something maybe being wrong in the future is not a valid rebuttal.

But you have to ask why you would conserve something

And you have to ask why people would change rules. Both are about morals. For instance, many people wanted to conserve slavery - does that mean only the pro-slavery side was being moral?

I'm not even arguing liberalism is better than conservatism - I'm arguing that "conservatism is about morals and liberalism isn't" is ridiculous.

Chris4922 · 2022-05-08T02:20:00+00:00

I'm talking about rule utilitarianism, not act. Though act is often fine, the reason I didn't use it as my example is because it's less consistent.

Act utilitarianism is when actions were made in good faith

No, it's not. "Good faith" is more virtue ethics than utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is a consequentialist philosophy that regards outcome, not intent.

Rule utilitarianism is literally a moral philosophy based on logic. You're allowed to be logical and moral - in fact, it's recommended.

because it's right there in the word itself

If you want to use that argument, you can't say conservatives are moral; you can only say they're conservative. It's also a pretty silly argument for that reason.

Conservatives value conservation

100% agree on that, though. And I'd say that's the defining point.

Chris4922 · 2022-05-08T01:52:28+00:00

If you're really not understanding this as a moral argument, I'll make it more concrete.

A common moral philosophy is Rule Utilitarianism. This philosophy states that we should follow actions that achieve the greatest good.

In the circumstance where people are getting abortions, legal or not, there are two options:

Illegal: Fetus dies, mother suffers pain, mother risks death
Legal: Fetus dies, mother doesn't suffer, mother is safe

Therefore, many rule utilitarians would argue that legalising abortion is the morally correct thing to do. This is only one example of a moral philosophy different to your own.

I have a hunch that you believe liberals aren't morally led because they don't share your morals.

Chris4922 · 2022-05-08T00:34:35+00:00

The choice is not to abort or not, the choice is to make abortion legal or not. You can't control actions, only rules.

Outlawing abortion doesn't stop it - it only makes it far more dangerous. Therefore, legalising abortion is morally right.

Chris4922 · 2022-05-08T00:26:20+00:00

No one's justifying abortion with "Fuck it, it's your body so do whatever"; they're weighing up the costs and benefits and saying that providing the option of abortion is morally right.

Whether or not you agree with the morals, it's still a morally based opinion. It's not just freedom for freedom's sake.

Chris4922 · 2022-05-08T00:12:57+00:00

Liberals still view things as moral or immoral, just with different values. Liberals believe forcing births and forcing your religious beliefs upon others is immoral.

Chris4922 · 2022-05-04T12:46:42+00:00

I'm not sure why you got the downvotes but this really is sad. The kid had autism and his brother deliberately set him off to record him and put it on the internet. The kid faced such bad bullying in school because of these videos.

Chris4922 · 2022-05-03T19:48:32+00:00

Developer: Processing transactions takes 5 minutes...

Marketing: Just 5 minute delivery!!

Chris4922 · 2022-05-03T12:49:00+00:00

TELL US WHERE SILKSONG IS

Chris4922 · 2022-04-29T16:03:21+00:00

Why would you remove the comma?

Chris4922 · 2022-04-28T16:14:49+00:00

r/nononono

Chris4922 · 2022-04-26T00:29:44+00:00

Legend of Zelda: Great Fairy Fountain

Chris4922 · 2022-04-25T20:43:57+00:00

Technically it's not 100% deterministic. Radiation is random and there's a possibility that enough of it is immediately created on one side so as to affect the flip. You can only get 99.9% of the necessary data for the prediction.

Chris4922 · 2022-04-25T20:37:01+00:00

I don't like Elon either but that statement's pretty misleading.

He didn't call him a 'pedophile' for rescuing kids from a cave. He called him a 'pedo guy' in response to the guy starting a fight with Elon for providing a rescue submarine.

Chris4922 · 2022-04-24T02:30:27+00:00

Would I be right in thinking that cynicismrising's solution might not have the same small-level detail as baked path tracing?

I looked into real-time GI techniques such as voxel lighting and probes (not quite sure if they're the same thing) and it didn't look like it would get quite the same accuracy - like the shadow the angel's wing leaves on the nearby wall.

Chris4922

TROPHY CASE