Re: Simulation argument in the NY Times

From: Matt Mahoney (
Date: Thu Aug 16 2007 - 20:56:47 MDT

--- Norman Noman <> wrote:

> > If we assume simulation, all the while that we know nothing about the
> > simulation's external context we can't make any assumptions about its
> > ultimate purpose or any interfaces with the environment.
> >
> > None.
> >
> > Any extrapolation is meaningless.
> This is simply not true. From what we know of the inside of the box, we can
> make predictions about the outside of the box. For instance, inside the box
> we find love, suffering, and oscillating fans. Therefore, it would seem
> probable that whoever or whatever is outside the box does not have a problem
> with these things existing.

These things can also arise from an enumeration of Turing machines. How can
we assume that the simulation was created by intelligent beings, much less
that they think like us?

-- Matt Mahoney,

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:58 MDT