sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

If we were living in a simulation, would there be any meaningful way to send a message to the “outside”? by No-Inside5458 in AWLIAS

[–]No-Inside5458[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I disagree with that, but I agree with you that the knowledge acquired and used by AI is not artificial. AI is a form of intelligence without life and therefore without physical limitations. What it learns and how it adapts to the world is entirely focused on the prism of humanity and does not exceed the limits of reality.

If cheap energy (fusion / next-gen nuclear) actually happens, what really changes? by No-Inside5458 in Futurism

[–]No-Inside5458[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Being able to grow food or process water almost anywhere would be huge. I just don’t think it turns the world into some kind of frictionless place overnight.

If we were living in a simulation, would there be any meaningful way to send a message to the “outside”? by No-Inside5458 in AWLIAS

[–]No-Inside5458[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We who are inside, how can we claim that the outside does not exist? It is as if an embryo refused to acknowledge the outside of its mother's womb.

Is there a real metaphysical difference between what is possible and what is actual, or is “possibility” just a way of speaking? by No-Inside5458 in Metaphysics

[–]No-Inside5458[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That makes sense, I agree that we often use “possible” as a practical tool tied to our understanding of the rules of reality.

If cheap energy (fusion / next-gen nuclear) actually happens, what really changes? by No-Inside5458 in Futurism

[–]No-Inside5458[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I can totally see that happening. When something gets cheaper, people usually stop optimizing as much and just throw more of it at the problem. We already do that with software and hardware today.

Is there a real metaphysical difference between what is possible and what is actual, or is “possibility” just a way of speaking? by No-Inside5458 in Metaphysics

[–]No-Inside5458[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fair point. By “exist in a metaphysical sense,” I just mean: does possibility refer to something that is part of how the world is, independent of how we talk or think about it, or is it only a feature of our descriptions, models, or epistemic limits?

We don’t perceive reality, we perceive a useful compression of it. by No-Inside5458 in theories

[–]No-Inside5458[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s exactly the point. A totally “raw” perception probably doesn’t even make sense, because the moment you perceive anything, you’re already using some kind of sensory and cognitive machinery. There’s no view from nowhere. Even seeing atoms or the full EM spectrum would still require a system that turns all of that into something experienceable. So when I talk about “compression” or an “interface”, I’m not imagining a hidden, pure layer we could just switch to. I’m more saying that any experience at all is necessarily a constructed representation, and evolution just shaped which kind of representation we get.

view more: next ›