Conversation
Notices
-
Embed this notice
@Arcana @MercurialBuilding @nemesis I think it makes sense from his mathbrain POV. As I see it Mercurial is asserting that the universe is basically an engine that consists of matter (and I guess dark matter/dark energy) that is organised by laws, and so the universe is either deterministic or probabilistic since everything is happening according to those laws acting upon matter. From this perspective the conception of the universe may be a fully original spark, but everything that happens after is the constant application of those laws from beginning to end. In this theory if you knew where everything was, and knew all the laws, and were smart enough, you could simulate the entire universe and watch it play out the same or predictably each time.
- :blobancap: :blobcattrans: :blobancap: :blobcattrans: :blobancap: :blobcattrans: likes this.
-
Embed this notice
@ai @nemesis @Arcana @MercurialBuilding >logical entropy being produced by decision-making
Taoists can't stop FUCKING WINNING 🥳
-
Embed this notice
@nemesis @Arcana @MercurialBuilding @hidden
To whomever is giving nemesis trouble irl: If you believe in free will, then exercise it by not doing that anymore. If you don't believe in free will, then we'll make you stop 🔪
I haven't read about UDT, but if the wikipedia screenshot is accurate then it seems like something I could get behind. Seems related to the "precommitment" I was ranting about earlier, because both deal with forced decisions in counterfactual worlds.
For this last message, I am 100% with you on the first three things. (I want to remark to @hidden that the third point, about logical entropy being produced by decision-making, is related to my take on Maxwell's Demon from a while ago, "knowledge is power.") I'm not sure I fully grok the last point because I can imagine an algorithm which merely processes information and draws inferences without making decisions, maximizing utilities, or computing optimal actions.
-
Embed this notice
@ai @Arcana @MercurialBuilding @hidden almost what I was going for but you left out updateless decision theory which is the key thing to grok imo
-
Embed this notice
@ai @Arcana @MercurialBuilding @hidden more specifically the key things to grok are that physical causality is a subset of logical causality (which I would view as ontologically fundamental), that there is a logical causal arrow pointing from the computation that is mercurialblack to the computation that is the universe (actually, ensemble of universes) in which he is instantiated, that there is genuinely logical entropy being produced when you make decisions due to the computational depth, and that this logical entropy is reflective of actual facts about the world which you would not know without running MercurialBlack or some more efficient decision algorithm
-
Embed this notice
@MercurialBuilding @hidden @Arcana @nemesis This thread might be getting a little heated and calling mercurial too low IQ to understand the responses is uncalled for imo. That said, I am a free will compatibilist and agree with nemesis. The key phrase is “impossible possible worlds”: the counterfactuals we’re talking about are impossible in a physically deterministic universe but are possible in a logical sense. It is valid to ask what would have happened if the same physical laws were run on different initial conditions or if the “mercurial’s brain” algorithm were run on different inputs. The behavior of systems in these “testing VMs” is my definition of “agency.”
This stance requires carefully distinguishing between matter (purely physical) and laws of matter (which are a logical construct). It relies on the belief that math governs not only this world but all possible worlds.
There’s a related interesting line of thought in philosophy which is “modal realism”: the belief that counterfactual worlds are just as “real” as the real world. I’m not familiar with the arguments though
-
Embed this notice
@hidden @Arcana @nemesis thank you, yeah. Laplace's demon.
-
Embed this notice
@MercurialBuilding @Arcana @ai @hidden I sadly suspect I cant communicate my broader worldview on this to anyone here but @ai however
-
Embed this notice
@nemesis @Arcana @ai @hidden I don't understand how, simultaneously, the territory can exist, and a being who acts in it can make choices
-
Embed this notice
@MercurialBuilding @Arcana @ai @hidden because there is a logical causal connection between the computational structure that is the being, and the computational structure that is the universe (including the being)
-
Embed this notice
@MercurialBuilding @Arcana @ai @hidden in an epistemic sense, this is a wrong question, because internalist justification is wrong; the territory exists, and as an effect, creatures within it are optimized for manipulating it and so form beliefs that it exists
in an ontological sense, "the territory" is actually contained on the logical causal horizon of your mind, because of the logical holographic principle
-
Embed this notice
@MercurialBuilding @Arcana @ai @hidden "knowing stuff" is in the map, not the territory
-
Embed this notice
@nemesis @Arcana @ai @hidden how do we know the territory exists?
-
Embed this notice
@MercurialBuilding @Arcana @ai @hidden where did I say anything about knowing stuff for certain
-
Embed this notice
@nemesis @Arcana @ai @hidden I can't know anything for certain, though.
That is a fucking retarded position to hold and I hate myself
-
Embed this notice
@nemesis @Arcana @ai @hidden we can never know that for certain, unfortunately, and I fucking hate myself that I believe that, but yes
-
Embed this notice
@MercurialBuilding @Arcana @ai @hidden as a wise woman once said (1 minute ago)
> 2+2=4 is a property of the territory, not the map
this is not a statement about beliefs, it is a statement about *reality*
you believe that 2+2=4, as a logical causal consequence of the fact that 2+2 really does equal 4
-
Embed this notice
@nemesis @Arcana @ai @hidden based on our understanding of the universe, yes, 2 + 2 = 4. If a calculator says otherwise, it's probably wrong, and if I believe otherwise, I'd be wrong.
-
Embed this notice
@MercurialBuilding @Arcana @ai @hidden 2+2=4 is a property of the territory, not the map
-
Embed this notice
@MercurialBuilding @Arcana @ai @hidden uhh no, actually, it is actually *true* that 2+2=4, and this fact may be reflected in a computation implemented by a calculator but it isn't *contingent* on it. the causality runs from 2+2=4 to the calculator, not the other way around
-
Embed this notice
@MercurialBuilding @Arcana @ai @hidden wat
if a cosmic ray flipped a bit in the calculator so that it printed 2+2=5, would you then think 2+2=5?
-
Embed this notice
@nemesis @Arcana @ai @hidden if my brain was the calculator, yes
We can imagine a 'perfect calculator' which wouldn't be affected by the outside world, but that'd be based on how we believe things to work
-
Embed this notice
@nemesis @Arcana @ai @hidden yes
-
Embed this notice
@nemesis @Arcana @ai @hidden how can we know that our computations are the result of more than the previous state of the universe?
If we're thinking that the universe doesn't exist outside our head, then it makes sense.
-
Embed this notice
@MercurialBuilding @Arcana @ai @hidden if a calculator prints "2+2=4" is this contingent on the physical state of the atoms in the calculator?
-
Embed this notice
@MercurialBuilding @Arcana @ai @hidden independent in what sense?
-
Embed this notice
@MercurialBuilding @Arcana @ai @hidden ah, well, it's not solipsistic that your beliefs and causal history genuinely are caused by the state of the world
-
Embed this notice
@nemesis @Arcana @ai @hidden goddamn it
Well if the world gave rose to it then how can we believe that our brains are independent?
-
Embed this notice
@nemesis @Arcana @ai @hidden ok I think that makes sense. Seems solipsistic. Better than lack of free will.
-
Embed this notice
@MercurialBuilding @Arcana @ai @hidden I cant be wholly certain since I havent actually invented a mathematical theory of logical causality yet but nope I don't think there is, I'm pretty sure an inference chain that observes the world to infer the state of your mind is just reasoning backwards along the causal chain
-
Embed this notice
@nemesis @Arcana @ai @hidden but there's also an arrow pointing from the particular universe (or universes) mercurial is instantiated in to mercurial himself
-
Embed this notice
@ai @Arcana @MercurialBuilding @hidden would be fun to chat about this some time yeah
I do plan on writing up a blog post about this at some point which should hopefully be a bit clearer than my schizo rants on fedi
-
Embed this notice
@ai @Arcana @MercurialBuilding @hidden I dont exactly view my highly ideosyncratic views on existing in an ensemble of universes in a mathematical multiverse held together by logical causality, and object identity defined by a logical holographic principle, as being purely a product of UDT but it's what got me thinking about these questions a long time ago as a young teenage rationalist
> I'm not sure I fully grok the last point because I can imagine an algorithm which merely processes information and draws inferences without making decisions, maximizing utilities, or computing optimal actions.
what is "computing an optimal action", if not "processing information and drawing inferences"? the point is that that an action is optimal, reflects actual features of the territory, not the map
-
Embed this notice
@nemesis @Arcana @MercurialBuilding @hidden My misunderstanding was a simple one, I just forgot that the "logical entropy" you're talking about was specified to be that which comes from making decisions. So yes, I agree that the key point is that the logical entropy (of the decision making) must reflect the territory - that a decision is something which responds *to the world* and that, far from taking away our free will, this is precisely what gives it to us, because it means that we decide differently in counterfactual worlds.
That phrase "logical holographic principle" piques my interest, but I will have to pick your brain some other time as I am getting sleepy...
?Hidden?
mist
nemesis (asbestos arc)
Construction Worker
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the