From: Eliezer Yudkowsky (sentience@pobox.com)
Date: Wed Jul 07 2004 - 10:15:15 MDT
Samantha Atkins wrote:
> I'll bite. How does the non-sim hypothesis predict our world more
> strongly than the sim hypothesis?
If the sim hypothesis is compatible to some degree with such things as
psychic powers, divine intervention, giant killer aardvarks, and many other
things which we have not in fact observed, then that *compatibility* - that
predictive probability mass - must have been diverted from other
possibilities. The sim hypothesis is compatible with many more possible
observations than the non-sim hypothesis, so the non-hypothesis must
predict our own world more strongly.
-- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://intelligence.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:47 MDT