We will observe ourselves creating AGI, and see the AGI creating a simulation to understand its own nature and its past, and that simulation will contain us, observing ourselves creating AGI; there is no way of knowing how deep into the loop we are
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
computational limits mean that can't possibly be true - simulated worlds are either much smaller or much simpler than outer worlds. First AGI likely also small, potentially smaller than humans who created it. AGI != Laplace's demon, could create paradox if it was.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @gallabytes @Plinz
I gave a talk about this at Princeton 3 years ago. Presumably the demon is tricking us about the existing of a quantum OS. I think u need reversibility to avoid those limits (in practice that's what quantum is for) & there's the berkenstein bound as an 'empirical' comp limit.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @boyphysiker @Plinz
hmm is it actually reversible in the relevant sense? I know QM is reversible if you have the entire joint state, but is there enough info to reconstruct that in every decohered Everett branch?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @gallabytes @Plinz
The way to make an irreversible computation reversible, is you embed it in reversible gates, like toffoli gates. You have to have a bunch of extra bits to make them perform AND OR NOT and COPY gates. Then you generate a bunch of junk along the way, extra debt.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Simpler way to explain this is to maintain an undo-history
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.