posted on October 22, 2020 04:55 AM by
u/OneInchPoster
32
u/vistandsforwaifu28 pointsat 1603362088.000000
brb taking the set of all Turing machines which output strings when
run with no input and weighting them proportional to 2−K, where K is the
description length of the Turing machine, shouldn’t take long
Oh yeah it definitely is. I just wouldn't bank on lesswrongers knowing anything about anything that is not mentioned in the first paragraph of the wikipedia page.
Yeah I just mean it's even more appropriate because with the halting problem the program in question (for which the problem is not trivial) runs on and on and you don't know if it will ever halt.
You would know if it halted, you could with a few tricks detect if it enters an endless loop, but that doesn't solve the problem because some programs just go on and on without either condition happening (and then may halt after unimaginably, I mean, incomputably many steps). edit: which honestly sounds like reading a rationalist essay.
The word “seems” is doing an awful lot of work in that post. Take a
shot for every “seems likely”, “seems possible”, “seems reasonable” etc
and you might be drunk enough by the end to agree with it.*
what the fuck famed sci-fi author charles stross is a sneerclubber???? nooooooooooooooo he's a ddeply evil person participating in a ddeply ebil proejct now! muh *singularity sky*
*cries in rationalist*
Remember, fiction is all about entertaining people with lies written for money!
Fiction doesn't give you any kind of definite insight into what the author believes. Although it often gives you insight into what they disbelieve/dislike -- that's much harder to hide -- and what they don't know.
imagine my shock when, knowing nothing about his personal beliefs (aside from what can be gleaned from his books, anyway), I heard him as a guest on trashfuture
Yeah I was thinking the same thing. This is what happens when you teach someone who knows a bit of python bits and pieces of complexity theory (Kolomogorov complexity/Solomonoff induction) and tell them they’re a genius
You can’t just say “oh but the difference in size of specification is
a constant factor, we’ll ignore it” when you’re discounting results
exponentially relative to the size of specification. Even if we accept
all the other handwaving, like claiming the Game of Life will actually
simulate intelligent life when not explicitly set up to run as something
similar, the total probability of such outcomes would be completely
dominated by simpler outcomes without those necessary preconditions.
It take me literally days of supercomputing time to simulate one
defect in a crystal atom, and it’s still not very accurate! But no,
we’re gonna get so good at simulating the entire universe from scratch
that aliens from other dimensions will hijack us from it. What the fuck
is this?
In seriousness this is my favorite discussion of Moore's law
[http://www.softmachines.org/wordpress/?p=2294](http://www.softmachines.org/wordpress/?p=2294)
This honestly reminds me of those books that were written in Europe
by religious nutcases about the specifics of how hell, heaven and
purgatory are configured.
Very different context but they just kind of feel similar you
know?
I’m concerned aliens are simulating universes to change the mean size
of the head of a pin in order to affect how many angels (on average) can
dance on its head. In this 20,000 word essay I hope to convince you
that…
I'm presuming this is [charles stross](https://twitter.com/cstross/status/1319299968637800451), who browses sneerclub and commented up there in this thread.
brb taking the set of all Turing machines which output strings when run with no input and weighting them proportional to 2−K, where K is the description length of the Turing machine, shouldn’t take long
[removed]
The word “seems” is doing an awful lot of work in that post. Take a shot for every “seems likely”, “seems possible”, “seems reasonable” etc and you might be drunk enough by the end to agree with it.*
*Do not do this, there are 12 “seems”
[deleted]
You can’t just say “oh but the difference in size of specification is a constant factor, we’ll ignore it” when you’re discounting results exponentially relative to the size of specification. Even if we accept all the other handwaving, like claiming the Game of Life will actually simulate intelligent life when not explicitly set up to run as something similar, the total probability of such outcomes would be completely dominated by simpler outcomes without those necessary preconditions.
It take me literally days of supercomputing time to simulate one defect in a crystal atom, and it’s still not very accurate! But no, we’re gonna get so good at simulating the entire universe from scratch that aliens from other dimensions will hijack us from it. What the fuck is this?
*Wolfram’s deep blue nuts explode—POP!—in a puff of malign confluent cellular automata*
SubstitutionSystem[{“A” -> “AHA”}, “HA”, ∞]
It’s Roko’s again. Different mechanism, same creation of demons, gods and angels.
This honestly reminds me of those books that were written in Europe by religious nutcases about the specifics of how hell, heaven and purgatory are configured.
Very different context but they just kind of feel similar you know?
I’m concerned aliens are simulating universes to change the mean size of the head of a pin in order to affect how many angels (on average) can dance on its head. In this 20,000 word essay I hope to convince you that…
Wait till the ergodicity revolution expands from economics and puts shows these ideas for the inanity that they are.
Oof.
Has Bayesianism fallen out of fashion?
[deleted]