Voice commands of a simulation's creator and text-to-3D, etc.

[excreationist]

In the Bible there is a creator that speaks things into existence using voice commands. In the future simulations could be initialized like this.... by using speech recognition to turn speech into text then AI could turn text into 3D, etc.

Current text-to-3D technology:

DreamFusion: Text-to-3D using 2D Diffusion

DreamFusion: Text-to-3D using 2D Diffusion, 2022.

dreamfusion3d.github.io

Text-to-video - shows how AI can create more complex scenarios including movement:

AI can now create videos. What happens when we can't tell if they're real or not?

Both Meta and Google have showed off DALL-E but for video — text-to-video AI models that can create photorealistic, coherent videos.

www.crikey.com.au

The AI could fill in all of the details of the creation voice commands...

Though I don’t think this process happened in our current world… I think we are in a simulation that began a few decades ago.

 

[bilby]

In the Bible there is a creator that speaks things into existence using voice commands. In the future simulations could be initialized like this.... by using speech recognition to turn speech into text then AI could turn text into 3D, etc.

Current text-to-3D technology:

DreamFusion: Text-to-3D using 2D Diffusion

DreamFusion: Text-to-3D using 2D Diffusion, 2022.

dreamfusion3d.github.io

Text-to-video - shows how AI can create more complex scenarios including movement:

AI can now create videos. What happens when we can't tell if they're real or not?

Both Meta and Google have showed off DALL-E but for video — text-to-video AI models that can create photorealistic, coherent videos.

www.crikey.com.au

The AI could fill in all of the details of the creation voice commands...

Though I don’t think this process happened in our current world… I think we are in a simulation that began a few decades ago.

If we were in a simulation, there would be no possible way to tell, from inside, how ling it has been running; It is no more likely to have begun a few decades ago than it is to have begun a hundred billion years ago, or five minutes ago.

Indeed, it may not even be sensible to discuss running time with reference only to clocks internal to the system; The elapsed time apparent to its inhabitants might have zero direct relationship to elapsed time in the universe of the creators of the simulation, or of the hardware on which it runs.

The external time required to simulate a second of time for the inhabitants could vary wildly from one second to the next.

So why pick 'a few decades ago', and in which reference do you believe this amount of time to have elapsed?

 

[excreationist]

Though I don’t think this process happened in our current world… I think we are in a simulation that began a few decades ago.

If we were in a simulation, there would be no possible way to tell, from inside, how ling it has been running; It is no more likely to have begun a few decades ago than it is to have begun a hundred billion years ago, or five minutes ago.

Check out the latest post here about cutting-edge simulation technology: (post #18)

Amazing new AI system - GPT-3 and generating images from text

GPT-3 is based on 175 billion weights such as a lot of Internet content... It can be used in many novel ways... It is pretty good at comprehending natural language - though sometimes has problems.... https://lacker.io/ai/2020/07/06/giving-gpt-3-a-turing-test.html Recently it was used to...

iidb.org

A simulation that lasts billions of years [in simulation time, not external time] would roughly require billions of times more resources than one that lasts a few years [in simulation time, not external time] (if you used the same time resolution and there was a similar number of elements/particles)

A chart about different types of simulations:

http://immortality-roadmap.com/simmap.pdf

Roughly a billion simulations that ran for a year would require the same resources as one that lasted for a billion years.

If your consciousness was in one of those simulations at random it would seem more likely that it is in one of the one year simulations. (since most years in the billion+ year simulation would contain no consciousnesses)

BTW I think Nick Bostrom proposes that it just involves a brain and inputs to that brain:

Are You Living in a Simulation?

The original paper that introduced the simulation argument

www.simulation-argument.com

Indeed, it may not even be sensible to discuss running time with reference only to clocks internal to the system; The elapsed time apparent to its inhabitants might have zero direct relationship to elapsed time in the universe of the creators of the simulation, or of the hardware on which it runs.

Exactly.... in the Roy game it takes several minutes for a lifespan:

And in Alan Watts' dream thought experiment each 8 hour night lasts 75 years within the simulation:

1.2.3. - Mythology of Hinduism - Pt. 1

I wonder, I wonder, what you would do if you had the power to dream at night, any dream you wanted to dream. And you would of course be able to alter your time-sense and slip, say seventy-five years of subjective time into eight hours of sleep. You would, I suppose, start out by […]

alanwatts.org

The external time required to simulate a second of time for the inhabitants could vary wildly from one second to the next.

So why pick 'a few decades ago', and in which reference do you believe this amount of time to have elapsed?

Because in those two last examples it involves a few decades for each life span. I'm not saying anything at all about how much time has passed in the outside world...

 

[bilby]

Though I don’t think this process happened in our current world… I think we are in a simulation that began a few decades ago.

If we were in a simulation, there would be no possible way to tell, from inside, how ling it has been running; It is no more likely to have begun a few decades ago than it is to have begun a hundred billion years ago, or five minutes ago.

Check out the latest post here about cutting-edge simulation technology: (post #18)

Amazing new AI system - GPT-3 and generating images from text

GPT-3 is based on 175 billion weights such as a lot of Internet content... It can be used in many novel ways... It is pretty good at comprehending natural language - though sometimes has problems.... https://lacker.io/ai/2020/07/06/giving-gpt-3-a-turing-test.html Recently it was used to...

iidb.org

A simulation that lasts billions of years [in simulation time, not external time] would roughly require billions of times more resources than one that lasts a few years [in simulation time, not external time] (if you used the same time resolution and there was a similar number of elements/particles)

A chart about different types of simulations:

http://immortality-roadmap.com/simmap.pdf

Roughly a billion simulations that ran for a year would require the same resources as one that lasted for a billion years.

If your consciousness was in one of those simulations at random it would seem more likely that it is in one of the one year simulations. (since most years in the billion+ year simulation would contain no consciousnesses)

BTW I think Nick Bostrom proposes that it just involves a brain and inputs to that brain:

Are You Living in a Simulation?

The original paper that introduced the simulation argument

www.simulation-argument.com

Indeed, it may not even be sensible to discuss running time with reference only to clocks internal to the system; The elapsed time apparent to its inhabitants might have zero direct relationship to elapsed time in the universe of the creators of the simulation, or of the hardware on which it runs.

Exactly.... in the Roy game it takes several minutes for a lifespan:

And in Alan Watts' dream thought experiment each 8 hour night lasts 75 years within the simulation:

1.2.3. - Mythology of Hinduism - Pt. 1

I wonder, I wonder, what you would do if you had the power to dream at night, any dream you wanted to dream. And you would of course be able to alter your time-sense and slip, say seventy-five years of subjective time into eight hours of sleep. You would, I suppose, start out by […]

alanwatts.org

The external time required to simulate a second of time for the inhabitants could vary wildly from one second to the next.

So why pick 'a few decades ago', and in which reference do you believe this amount of time to have elapsed?

Because in those two last examples it involves a few decades for each life span. I'm not saying anything at all about how much time has passed in the outside world...

Sounds to me like extreme narcissism.

You believe that the universe is a few decades old, because you are a few decades old.

That lacks humility, to say the least. Particularly as there's no evidence whatsoever to back it up, other than your own existence.

 

[excreationist]

Sounds to me like extreme narcissism.

You believe that the universe is a few decades old, because you are a few decades old.

It is also partly based on what Elon Musk said:

“...the games will become indistinguishable from reality. ...there would probably be billions of such computers and set-top boxes. ...it would seem to follow that the odds that we're in base reality (NOT a simulation) is one in billions”

Where each game has a player (or multiple players) and the games would run for the life of the player....

Assuming Alan Watts believed in his dream thought experiment would you say that he also has a case of "extreme narcissism"?

That lacks humility, to say the least.

So do emperors that proclaimed themselves to be a god.... (though in Alan Watts' thought experiment he began with god-like abilities)
I think the world acts in a way that it seems as if there are billions of years of history and that I'm just one of the billions of real humans.....

Particularly as there's no evidence whatsoever to back it up, other than your own existence.

Well it is just my belief. I think the simulation is indistinguishable from base reality.

 

[bilby]

Sounds to me like extreme narcissism.

You believe that the universe is a few decades old, because you are a few decades old.

It is also partly based on what Elon Musk said:

Elon Musk is very definitely a case of extreme narcissism, and lack of humility.

He's nowhere near to being as clever as he demands everyone think he is.

“...the games will become indistinguishable from reality. ...there would probably be billions of such computers and set-top boxes. ...it would seem to follow that the odds that we're in base reality (NOT a simulation) is one in billions”

Yeah, he's wrong. To simulate reality such that the simulation is indistinguishable from the real universe would require a computer at least the size and complexity of the observable universe.

Imagining billions of such computers, where no evidence exists for them, is just silliness.

The only reason Musk's daft ideas aren't laughed out of town is that he's rich. But wealth isn't a sign of intellect, nor of wisdom.

Where each game has a player (or multiple players) and the games would run for the life of the player....

Assuming Alan Watts believed in his dream thought experiment would you say that he also has a case of "extreme narcissism"?

Yes.

That lacks humility, to say the least.

So do emperors that proclaimed themselves to be a god.... (though in Alan Watts' thought experiment he began with god-like abilities)
I think the world acts in a way that it seems as if there are billions of years of history and that I'm just one of the billions of real humans.....

Particularly as there's no evidence whatsoever to back it up, other than your own existence.

Well it is just my belief. I think the simulation is indistinguishable from base reality.

So it lacks parsimony, as well as humility.

 

[excreationist]

Sounds to me like extreme narcissism.

I don't think it even involves mild narcissism

Narcissistic personality disorder - Symptoms and causes

www.mayoclinic.org

have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for excessive attention and admiration, troubled relationships,

Well I've been happily married for ten years. I have a good relationship with my family but don't see some of my friends as often as I'd like.

and a lack of empathy for others

I have quite a lot of empathy

But behind this mask of extreme confidence

I don't think I have a mask of extreme confidence

lies a fragile self-esteem that's vulnerable to the slightest criticism

Well this was the case when I was younger but messageboards/etc have gotten me used to criticism even severe criticism.....

 

[excreationist]

Elon Musk is very definitely a case of extreme narcissism, and lack of humility.

Ok that could be right. Though perhaps he is showing some humility when he was on SNL:

“...the games will become indistinguishable from reality. ...there would probably be billions of such computers and set-top boxes. ...it would seem to follow that the odds that we're in base reality (NOT a simulation) is one in billions”

Yeah, he's wrong. To simulate reality such that the simulation is indistinguishable from the real universe would require a computer at least the size and complexity of the observable universe.

Perhaps you didn't check out the post I mentioned (post #18)

Amazing new AI system - GPT-3 and generating images from text

GPT-3 is based on 175 billion weights such as a lot of Internet content... It can be used in many novel ways... It is pretty good at comprehending natural language - though sometimes has problems.... https://lacker.io/ai/2020/07/06/giving-gpt-3-a-turing-test.html Recently it was used to...

iidb.org

"....a sort of 3D simulator that really could be truly indiscernible from reality yet also entirely unique and dynamic in its like possibility...."
Indistinguishable from reality means that it is from the point of view of the player... not from an external observer. Like a person hooked up to the Matrix.

Imagining billions of such computers, where no evidence exists for them, is just silliness.

Again check out post #18. And Elon Musk allows 10,000 years for this to happen.

The only reason Musk's daft ideas aren't laughed out of town is that he's rich. But wealth isn't a sign of intellect, nor of wisdom.

Note that he is also partly behind OpenAI and Neuralink. OpenAI is behind DALL-E from that thread, etc.

Assuming Alan Watts believed in his dream thought experiment would you say that he also has a case of "extreme narcissism"?

Yes.

He doesn't seem to have the symptoms of narcissism - perhaps you're talking about your own definition of narcissism.

Particularly as there's no evidence whatsoever to back it up, other than your own existence.

Well it is just my belief. I think the simulation is indistinguishable from base reality.

So it lacks parsimony, as well as humility.

I think my belief that it is impossible for me to convince skeptics does involve humility (maybe). I think my belief that it is part of a game in the future involves parsimony - i.e. something that is relatively cheap rather than your hypothetical version which you say "would require a computer at least the size and complexity of the observable universe".

 

[excreationist]

In the SNL video Elon says he has Aspergers....

Narcissism Or Autism Spectrum Disorder: Which One Is it?

Narcissism Or Autism Spectrum Disorder: Which One Is it? - Autism Spectrum Disorder and narcissism may appear one and the same but they are very different, driven by a completely different cause. The

kennethrobersonphd.com

Both narcissists and those with ASD appear self-absorbed and neglectful of others, interested only in themselves and caring little about others but the reasons they act this way are much different.

Autism Spectrum Disorder Wants structure, predictability, order.
Narcissism Thrives on chaos, disorder