Current Events > Elon Musk says we should be more afraid of technology

(+) Yeah! (+)

Thoughts?
---

Agree with him in a lot of ways.

A lot of his points are worth discussing.

I also firmly support his "fear the ai" stance and am glad someone with as much reach as him is trying to turn the focus to real potential issues instead of "enslaving humanity".
---

elon musk is an alien or a time traveler so we should always heed his warnings
---

Zeeak4444 posted...

Agree with him in a lot of ways.

A lot of his points are worth discussing.

I also firmly support his "fear the ai" stance and am glad someone with as much reach as him is trying to turn the focus to real potential issues instead of "enslaving humanity".

What do you think of the simulation hypothesis?
---

he's not wrong
---

That man is just one college experiment away from becoming another Unabomber.
---

assassinCrash posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

Agree with him in a lot of ways.

A lot of his points are worth discussing.

I also firmly support his "fear the ai" stance and am glad someone with as much reach as him is trying to turn the focus to real potential issues instead of "enslaving humanity".

@assassinCrash
What do you think of the simulation hypothesis?

Sorry I just saw this.

I read an article about three weeks ago that proposed the idea that our laws of physics were estentially limiters on the simulation (I'm computer illiterate in a lot of ways so I guess capping out the CPU or processor or whatever might be more correct).

I thought that was an interesting concept tbh. My friends really into it so I've done a good amount of research and have discussed it at length with him on multiple occasions.

I love talking about these types of things so I'm more than happy to but unfortunately my stance is pretty much- "I don't believe it myself, however, if it was the case I wouldn't be the least bit surprised and would probably take the news about as well as you could".

Same stance on most things from rokos basilisk to aliens.
---

What kind of processing power would it take to run the current simulation of our planet? The collision detection is incredible and to have an entire planet running it all at the same time is insane.
---

fan357 posted...

What kind of processing power would it take to run the current simulation of our planet? The collision detection is incredible and to have an entire planet running it all at the same time is insane.

You wouldn't actually need to simulate the planet itself, only the minds of the people.
---

There's just something about him that make me inherently distrust him. Having said that I don't think he's wrong about this.
---

fan357 posted...

What kind of processing power would it take to run the current simulation of our planet? The collision detection is incredible and to have an entire planet running it all at the same time is insane.

I imagine if it really was the case it would be uncomprehendable to us.

Or it could be something absurd like powered by a unified or linked brain.

Or we could all exist in some Boltzmann brain as it's consciousness or something ridiculous.

Note that I don't believe any of these I'm just throwing out the three things that popped into my head. There's far better theories out there but I can't recall the names and won't make a fool of myself trying to articulate them (I apologize).
---

Gen_Lee_Enfield posted...

There's just something about him that make me inherently distrust him. Having said that I don't think he's wrong about this.

I know what you mean but for some reason that's only made me trust him more over the years oddly enough.

After PayPal I was like eh. Probably like early space X I was still super skeptical but now I honestly consider him one of the most influential, and more importantly, inspirational figures of my life (so far).
---

Aristoph posted...

fan357 posted...

What kind of processing power would it take to run the current simulation of our planet? The collision detection is incredible and to have an entire planet running it all at the same time is insane.

You wouldn't actually need to simulate the planet itself, only the minds of the people.

But if we run into each other we still bounce off each other. It wouldn't need a physics simulator.
---

I think Elon's head is like 80 years in the future and he's overreacting a bit when it comes to what is actually a threat in 2017.
---

hes right.


i found two studies by the US that wireless can cause sperm problems.

imagine those people in power using AI kinda like in minority report
---

fan357 posted...

Aristoph posted...

fan357 posted...

What kind of processing power would it take to run the current simulation of our planet? The collision detection is incredible and to have an entire planet running it all at the same time is insane.

You wouldn't actually need to simulate the planet itself, only the minds of the people.

But if we run into each other we still bounce off each other. It wouldn't need a physics simulator.

Eh, it could be argued collision detection still exists in dreams.
---

Can't you design it like Amon designed the Zerg Overmind and strip it of free will by introducing iron-clad compulsions if it strays away from its directives?
---

fan357 posted...

But if we run into each other we still bounce off each other. It wouldn't need a physics simulator.

No, you only need to simulate the brain's reaction to "running into something." If you bang your toe against the leg of a chair, the only reason you know it happened is because it triggered the nerves in your toe to send signals to your brain, where it was processed and perceived as pain. And the only reason you'd know the chair moved was because your eyes picked up the changing light waves and sent signals to your brain that were perceived as motion. The physical reality doesn't need to be simulated as long as the correct nerve impulses and brain activity are done so accurately.
---

Life Sympathy posted...

Can't you design it like Amon designed the Zerg Overmind and strip it of free will by introducing iron-clad compulsions if it strays away from its directives?

Most the worries aren't about the AI overthrowing the humans in an uprising like many believe.

He's worried far more about automation and the displacement of work for the people adding to an already taxing situation.
---

Aristoph posted...

fan357 posted...

But if we run into each other we still bounce off each other. It wouldn't need a physics simulator.

No, you only need to simulate the brain's reaction to "running into something." If you bang your toe against the leg of a chair, the only reason you know it happened is because it triggered the nerves in your toe to send signals to your brain, where it was processed and perceived as pain. And the only reason you'd know the chair moved was because your eyes picked up the changing light waves and sent signals to your brain that were perceived as motion. The physical reality doesn't need to be simulated as long as the correct nerve impulses and brain activity are done so accurately.

I totally figured he was talking about unconscious states such as sleep.

Would it be the same case? Do our input sensors fire/react in our sleep so to speak?
---

The brave hide behind technology. The stupid hide from it. But the clever have technology, and hide it.
- The Book of Cataclysm
---

Zeeak4444 posted...

Life Sympathy posted...

Can't you design it like Amon designed the Zerg Overmind and strip it of free will by introducing iron-clad compulsions if it strays away from its directives?

Most the worries aren't about the AI overthrowing the humans in an uprising like many believe.

He's worried far more about automation and the displacement of work for the people adding to an already taxing situation.

Probably because he knows his fellow 1%ers will be all too happy to dispose of the 'useless eaters' once we've built a robot utopia for them

Zeeak4444 posted...

Would it be the same case? Do our input sensors fire/react in our sleep so to speak?

More like the brain simulates the input sensors. I don't think your actual toe is physically sending pain signals if you stub it in a dream, since the actual nerves haven't been triggered. But your brain has felt that signal before and remembers it, so it can simulate that input in the dream. Same with vision in dreams. Your eyes are closed, and you're obviously not actually seeing whatever you're looking at in your dream, but your brain has experience with interpreting signals from your eyes so it is able to simulate that experience to allow you to "see" while dreaming.
---

But if an earthquake strikes an empty building and stuff moves without anyone seeing it everyone will still see the same results afterward.
---

Yup.

Not the 1st i heard of this. Now i think he made the AI already and found out the hard way.
---

fan357 posted...

But if an earthquake strikes an empty building and stuff moves without anyone seeing it everyone will still see the same results afterward.

And? All of the minds in the simulation would inherently be connected, otherwise the aforementioned "running into" another of the simulated minds wouldn't be possible. Basically, they're all synchronized. So when the first person goes into that building the simulation would generate the inputs and then store that knowledge in the "RAM" so that it could give the same inputs to the next person to come along.

There's obviously got to be some kind of overall framework outside of just the minds in the simulation if they're going to all be experiencing the same world. But storing data like that is not the same as simulating the entire planet.

Of course, that is all assuming they do all experience the same world, which isn't in any way a given. Every single mind in the simulation could very easily be experiencing a wildly different world, so their interactions would never actually be between two distinct simulated minds.
---

Aristoph posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

Would it be the same case? Do our input sensors fire/react in our sleep so to speak?

More like the brain simulates the input sensors. I don't think your actual toe is physically sending pain signals if you stub it in a dream, since the actual nerves haven't been triggered. But your brain has felt that signal before and remembers it, so it can simulate that input in the dream. Same with vision in dreams. Your eyes are closed, and you're obviously not actually seeing whatever you're looking at in your dream, but your brain has experience with interpreting signals from your eyes so it is able to simulate that experience to allow you to "see" while dreaming.

That makes a lot of sense. Thanks for breaking that down for me, dreams are an enigma to me, I feel like it's extremely hard to find any good information on them aside from brain activity and such.

To my knowledge nightmares have little to no research on them period.
---

Aristoph posted...

fan357 posted...

But if an earthquake strikes an empty building and stuff moves without anyone seeing it everyone will still see the same results afterward.

And? All of the minds in the simulation would inherently be connected, otherwise the aforementioned "running into" another of the simulated minds wouldn't be possible. Basically, they're all synchronized. So when the first person goes into that building the simulation would generate the inputs and then store that knowledge in the "RAM" so that it could give the same inputs to the next person to come along.

There's obviously got to be some kind of overall framework outside of just the minds in the simulation if they're going to all be experiencing the same world. But storing data like that is not the same as simulating the entire planet.

Of course, that is all assuming they do all experience the same world, which isn't in any way a given. Every single mind in the simulation could very easily be experiencing a wildly different world, so their interactions would never actually be between two distinct simulated minds.

That's an incredibly interesting thought.
---

Zeeak4444 posted...

To my knowledge nightmares have little to no research on them period.

Nightmares would be a nightmare to study! Haha....ha....I'll get my coat. >__>

But seriously, dreams are relatively simple to study by comparison because it's pretty consistent. If someone goes to sleep, they're probably going to dream (even if they don't remember it when they wake up). But nightmares are a fairly rare occurrence and there's no real surefire method to produce one on command. You could study the same subject every single night for years on end without getting a single piece of usable data because they simply didn't have a nightmare. I can't remember the last one I had personally, for example, but has to have been at least 4 or 5 years.
---

Aristoph posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

To my knowledge nightmares have little to no research on them period.

Nightmares would be a nightmare to study! Haha....ha....I'll get my coat. >__>

But seriously, dreams are relatively simple to study by comparison because it's pretty consistent. If someone goes to sleep, they're probably going to dream (even if they don't remember it when they wake up). But nightmares are a fairly rare occurrence and there's no real surefire method to produce one on command. You could study the same subject every single night for years on end without getting a single piece of usable data because they simply didn't have a nightmare. I can't remember the last one I had personally, for example, but has to have been at least 4 or 5 years.

You think people would actually be interested in that stuff?

Edit: interested enough to actually be able to come here or get me there for a study, I mean, that's a pretty big grant I'd imagine.

I've had nightmares about 5-6 days a week minimum for the last 10 years or so. I still do and usually can remember about 60% of them for long enough to jot them down in a notebook if I'm not too lazy to get up (which I usually am so I just think about them).
---

I know quite a bit about dreams. Its still largely a mystery but there are patterns.

what you described is probably nightmare disorder.

I suffer from anxiety sleeping disorder.

And I have remember at least 2-3 dreams per night.
lots of reoccuring themes and dreams.
---

Zeeak4444 posted...

Aristoph posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

To my knowledge nightmares have little to no research on them period.

Nightmares would be a nightmare to study! Haha....ha....I'll get my coat. >__>

But seriously, dreams are relatively simple to study by comparison because it's pretty consistent. If someone goes to sleep, they're probably going to dream (even if they don't remember it when they wake up). But nightmares are a fairly rare occurrence and there's no real surefire method to produce one on command. You could study the same subject every single night for years on end without getting a single piece of usable data because they simply didn't have a nightmare. I can't remember the last one I had personally, for example, but has to have been at least 4 or 5 years.

You think people would actually be interested in that stuff?

I've had nightmares about 5-6 days a week minimum for the last 10 years or so. I still do and usually can remember about 60% of them for long enough to jot them down in a notebook if I'm not too lazy to get up (which I usually am so I just think about them).

I'm sure there's several researchers out there somewhere that would love you. I personally think everybody's got some quirk about them that would make them the perfect test subject for some researcher somewhere and they just never actually happen to connect. It's pretty ridiculous the kinds of random, strange, and sometimes seemingly completely arbitrary focuses scientists and researchers can come up with to ask questions about.

Couldn't hurt to do a little digging and see if there's a sleep study going on somewhere near where you live.
---

AmonAmarth posted...

I know quite a bit about dreams. Its still largely a mystery but there are patterns.

what you described is probably nightmare disorder.

I suffer from anxiety sleeping disorder.

And I have remember at least 2-3 dreams per night.
lots of reoccuring themes and dreams.

No ideas or leading theories on the cause though?

I've looked around but I can only find like history and symptoms but nothing about proposed causes or anything like that except speculation that stress might have something to do with it (which itself is heavily disputed).
---

ya there isnt much solutions or exact causes (just long lists of possible causes).

there are increasing amount of sleep studies, with rem sleeping,
but these things like i said largely remain a mystery with speculation involved.
---

Aristoph posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

Aristoph posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

To my knowledge nightmares have little to no research on them period.

Nightmares would be a nightmare to study! Haha....ha....I'll get my coat. >__>

But seriously, dreams are relatively simple to study by comparison because it's pretty consistent. If someone goes to sleep, they're probably going to dream (even if they don't remember it when they wake up). But nightmares are a fairly rare occurrence and there's no real surefire method to produce one on command. You could study the same subject every single night for years on end without getting a single piece of usable data because they simply didn't have a nightmare. I can't remember the last one I had personally, for example, but has to have been at least 4 or 5 years.

You think people would actually be interested in that stuff?

I've had nightmares about 5-6 days a week minimum for the last 10 years or so. I still do and usually can remember about 60% of them for long enough to jot them down in a notebook if I'm not too lazy to get up (which I usually am so I just think about them).

I'm sure there's several researchers out there somewhere that would love you. I personally think everybody's got some quirk about them that would make them the perfect test subject for some researcher somewhere and they just never actually happen to connect. It's pretty ridiculous the kinds of random, strange, and sometimes seemingly completely arbitrary focuses scientists and researchers can come up with to ask questions about.

Couldn't hurt to do a little digging and see if there's a sleep study going on somewhere near where you live.

That's so true lol that's probably one of my favorite things about research in any field. Little things that spark an inquisitive mind have led to some incredible things.

I think I'll do that as well actually, I appreciate the idea.
---

AmonAmarth posted...

ya there isnt much solutions or exact causes (just long lists of possible causes).

there are increasing amount of sleep studies, with rem sleeping,
but these things like i said largely remain a mystery with speculation involved.

Well and I can't really blame the lack of research as well. Not only have we only recently been able to research them but we have more pressing concerns to work on as well.

Very interesting though.
---

Also, back to the simulation thing, the YouTube channel "Science and Futurism with Isaac Arthur" has a couple pretty neat videos on this kind of stuff.

The Simulation Hypothesis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXIpR_agyl4

Matrioshka Brains (theoretical computer capable of simulating trillions of human minds simultaneously, based on the concept of a Dyson Sphere/Swarm):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ef-mxjYkllw

And honestly if you're into this kind of thing in general you should check out his whole channel. He goes into some really interesting concepts and he's pretty good at breaking them down as well as backing them up with some facts and numbers to help grasp the sheer scale of it all.
---