(no title)
swid | 1 month ago
A simulation of a bomb does not produce a blast, but a true simulation containing a consciousness does produce consciousness.
swid | 1 month ago
A simulation of a bomb does not produce a blast, but a true simulation containing a consciousness does produce consciousness.
andsoitis|1 month ago
that logic is circular. If you need consciousness ("containing a consciousness") in order to produce consciousness, it begs the question where the consciousness comes from.
swid|1 month ago
andsoitis|1 month ago
Consciousness is the state of having experiences.
Self-awareness is the ability to recognize yourself as the subject of your experiences. In other words, consciousness is a dependency for self-awareness.
It is interesting to ponder what experiences a simulation could have and whether the simulator (human) needs to anticipate what kinds of experiences they want the simulation to be able to experience and build for that.
In organisms, we think that consciousness has arisen due to evolution by natural selection because it aids in the ability for the genetic code to reproduce (survive + multiply).
It isn't obvious why consciousness would spontaneously emerge in a simulation (what's the point?) as a simulation is digital and can spread without the need for consciousness.
swid|1 month ago
If that is possible; then perhaps there are many simplified simulations that can still be large and fast enough to support evolution. Or we can leverage actual reality as well, to give digital life embodied experiences in the real world.
Thinking the simulation needs to spread is the wrong way to think about it. The universe does not need to multiply into more universes. If I replace simulation with universe in your final paragraph, the argument makes little sense to me. There can be competition within a simulation, and consciousness seems useful where competition and survival are somehow part of that.