Be nice to see that fixed, when is 0.18 going to be officially released? That seems like a pretty high number on release candidates. Though I understand there's some controversy with captcha removal, how's that going to pan out?
I think because everyone has their own corners, the common spaces don’t need to be as toxic. Also, Lemmy’s population is self selected because of the still high bar to entry. Lemmy basically feels like early Reddit. The hostile influence of moderators and the backlash anger everyone feels from being mistreated by them into silence is not yet here.
I had a similar thought a while back. I got into making pens. There's a bit of a learning curve and some equipment necessary to get started, but once you get the hang of it, you can turn $20 of materials into $100+, and people with money to blow go nuts for them. I sold 3 pens for $300 to one person not so long ago.
Biggest thing you'll need is a lathe. I got a Wen lathe on amazon for like $150. Get some carbide turning tools for like $40 and you're mostly set.
Here’s my solution to Newcomb’s Paradox: the predictor can be perfectly infallible if it records your physical state and then runs a simulation to predict which box you’ll pick. E.g. it could run a fancy MRI on you as you are walking through the hallway towards the room, quickly run a faster-than-real-time physical simulation, and deposit the correct opaque box into the room before you open the door. The box, the hallway, the room, the door are all part of the simulation.
Here’s the thing: a computer simulation of a person is just as conscious as a physical person, for all intents of “consciousness”. So as you are inside the room making your decision, you have no way of knowing if you are the physical you or the simulated you. The predictor is a liar in a way. The predictor is telling the simulated you that you’ll get a billion dollars, but stating the rules is just part of the simulation! The simulated you will actually be killed/shut down when you open the box. Only the physical you has a real chance to get a billion dollars. The predictor is counting on you to not call it out on its lie or split hairs and just take the money.
So if you think you might be in a simulation, the question is: are you generous enough towards your identical physical copy from 1 second ago to cooperate and one-box? Or are you going to spitefully deprive them of a billion dollars by two-boxing just because you are about to be killed anyway? Remember, you don’t even know which one you are. And if you are the spiteful kind, consider that we are already making much smaller time-cooperative trade-offs all the time, such as the you-now taking a breath just so that the you-five-seconds-from-now doesn’t suffocate to death.
What if the predictor doesn’t use a MRI or whatever? I posit that whatever prediction method it uses, if the method is sufficiently advanced to be infallible then somewhere in the process it MUST be creating conscious observer instances.
You never know the shenanigans of a machine, and one million is largely enough for me until I die, or if science gives us the option to live forever I bet machines will do the work for us :-)
Edit: as I believe the machine can be wrong, I’d probably take A + B
I think the major unanswered question is how reliable do we think the machine is? 50%? 100%? I think the most interesting scenario is one where we are convinced that the machine actually predicts the future and always predicts correctly, so I’ll continue with that assumption in mind.
From one point of view, we have no reason not to take both boxes, since we can’t alter the machine’s prediction now, it’s already happened. I think however that this undermines my premise. Choosing both boxes only makes sense if we don’t actually believe the machine predicts the future.
One would be tempted to say "alright, then I will choose only box B, as the machine will have predicted that and I will get lots of money. If I were to choose both boxes, the machine would have predicted that too, and I would get much less money.
My argument is that both answers are wrong in a sneaky way: assuming an actual perfect predictor, my answer is box B only. However, the important part here is that this will not be, in fact, a choice. The result was already determined ahead of time, so I really only had that one option.
I think the example of it working like email is the most intuitive for most people. We can all understand that @yahoo.com and @gmail.com interact with eachother despite being different service.
I would also make 1 or 2 recommendations of an instance you like because the overwhelming choice is too much for people. Imagine if you never heard of gmail or yahoo or outlook. Why choose those over @abcjoe.com? When @abcjoe.com end up sucking they'll probably just think all email sucks.
asklemmy
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.