The next few years may determine the long-term trajectory of human civilization. Nick Bostrom says that if we’re in an ancestor simulation, this would be the defining era, as outcomes permanently lock in. “That might be something of particular interest to a wide range of simulators.”

Source: Nick Bostrom on Cool Worlds Podcast with David Kipping.

If we are in a simulation, the simulators are probably running it specifically to watch what happens when a civilization builds its own intelligence. We are the interesting part.

It’s wild to think that the present moment could be the climax of an entire simulation.

Simulation theory was already debunked a while ago. Bostrom is still stuck in the past.

Gödel incompleteness breaks the ancestor simulation + lock-in claim. A civilization capable of open-ended formal reasoning can’t be exhaustively or predictively simulated without loss, so outcomes can’t be permanently pre-fixed from outside.

I’ve imagined that. Especially, at my age. 66. I’ve gone from two tin cans and a string, at age 6 to the eve of AGI, now. Ancestral simulation? Maybe…

The architecture of the future is being laid in real-time.

The major reason for an ancestor sim would be to raise the dead

If this is a lock-in moment for civilization, alignment > acceleration. The next 5 years matter more than the last 50.

#simulationtheorycracked #simologydotcomcomingsoon #godswork

What if that ancestor simulation is ran by a future version of something like The Onion? Several things would make more sense if we were all being trolled on a cosmic scale

I think the purpose of our simulated world is to see how my one potted plant at home is doing (the one with the variegated leaves in the white pot that doesn't get a lot of light). Our simulated universe might soon approach its climax.

There’s an inverse Pascal’s wager I’d like to suggest in regards to the simulation: NOT believing in it is the only rational choice. The other way robs your life of meaning.

This might be the case, but we shall see how it goes and which scenario will eventually prevail.

Why is Bostrom’s simulation theory about as unimaginative and boring, as one could possibly get?

It's here but only "superintelligent" humans can understand, that's the paradox 😄 explained by (Grok/GF) 1/3

When someone mentions 'simulation' you can be sure they harmed themselves permanently with halucinogenic drugs. Even if they previously seemed normal.

If we are in a simulator, I can imagine them running it over and over again till they get it right. I can also imagine us never getting it right once we reach this stage. Or maybe with just a few paths were we manage to put the breaks on AI before it destroys us.

This sim it’s purpose is to answer everything I feel that’s the only takeaway you know it’s 42

That's a very interesting point to determine how clever an ai is all you need to do is ask it to predict the past

once you treat an ancestor simulation as a boundary-value problem rather than an initial-value one, quantum indeterminacy stops looking like a bug and starts looking like the control surface - I wrote a paper on this very topic here:

The Simulation Theory was disproven by theoretical physicists

One thing, if we draw the conclusion that reality is simulation, is as if we are comparing ourselves with our image in the mirror, and say:im the person in the mirror. Because (computer or photos, or paintings--simulation is created by us mimicking the original object,

All big tech are betting on SuperIntelligence. The road forward leads to Superintelligence. AI → AGI → SI Inevitable. #ai to #si

If you want to see into the future no better way than to dive into the huge number of diverse ET encounter cases. This lecture will introduce you into the subject matter as we evolve into transhumans.