Comment by InDubioProRubio
3 months ago
Maybe we need gazelles and cheetahs - many gazelle-agents getting chased towards a goal, doing the brute force work- and the constraint cheetahs chase them, evaluate them and leave them alive (memory intact) as long as they come up with better and better solutions. Basically a evolutionary algo, running on top of many agents, running simultaneously on the same hardware?
Do you want stressed and panicking agents? Do you think they'll produce good output?
In my prompting experience, I mostly do my best to give the AI way, way more slack than it thinks it has.
No, i want the hunters to zap the prey with tiredness. Basically electron holes, hunting for free electrons, annhilating state. Neurons have something similar, were they usually prevent endless excitement and hyperfixation, which is why a coder in flow is such a strange thing.
I had the opposite thought. Opposite to evolution...
What if we are a CREATED (i.e. instant created, not evolved) set of humans, and evolution and other backstories have been added so that the story of our history is more believable?
Could it be that humanity represents a de novo (Latin for "anew") creation, bypassing the evolutionary process? Perhaps our perception of a gradual ascent from primitive origins is a carefully constructed narrative designed to enhance the credibility of our existence within a larger framework.
What if we are like the Minecraft people in this simulation?
I feel that is too complicated. The most simplest explanation is usually the right one. I think we live on an earth with actual history. Note that this does not necessarily mean that we are not living in a simulation, as history itself can be simulated.
If we are indeed in a simulation, I feel there are too many details to be "designed" by a being. There are too many facts that are connected and unless they fix the "bugs" as they appear and reboot the simulation constantly, I don't think it is designed. Otherwise we would have noticed the glitches by now.
If we are in a simulation, it has probably been generated by a computer following a set of rules. Maybe it ran a simplified version to evolve millions of possible earths, and then we are living in the version they selected for the final simulation? In that case all the facts would align and it could potentially be harder to noticed the glitches.
I don't think we are living in a simulation because bugs are hard to avoid, even with close to "infinite" computing power. With great power comes great possibilities for bugs
Perhaps we are in fact living in one of the simplified simulations and will be turned off at any second after I have finished this senten
We also can't rule out that Gaia or Odin made the world five minutes ago, and went to great lengths to make the world appear ancient.
It certainly makes sense if you assume that the world is a simulation. But does it actually explain anything that isn't equally well explained by assuming the simulation simulated the last 13 billion years, and evolution really happened?
As long as we don't get to the point of being able to simulate a Universe ourselves, the odds are against us being in a simulation, it seems! :)
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/EeqyGquTHK4
1 reply →
This only works (genetic algo) if you have some random variability in the population. For different models it would work but I feel like it's kind of pointless without the usual feedback mechanism (positive traits are passed on).