Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="2old4this" data-source="post: 17785" data-attributes="member: 174998">SETI does not ignore the time difference, which is why initial attempts centred on nearby stars. I think that obtaining proof of intelligent signals from another world would be a profound and defining moment for mankind. Establishing 2-way contact would be a separate step (and there are many in the SETI programme who believe that it would be a dangerous step to announce our presence).Back to the simulation - I am inclined to believe that we will in the future have developed computer modelling to such a degree of sophisication that we will easily be capable of running simulations at least as complex as our own world. With the advent of quantum computers on the horizon the possibility seems ever more real. Already today we are able to develop huge neural networks. If consciousness is an emergent property of complex systems (rather than some metaphysical phenomenon as the dualists believe) then we will undoubtedly soon be able to create (simulate?) consciousness. From such an entities's viewpoint with&nbsp; probably limited perspective and sensory input, it may well seem unthinkable that it could be simulated. In fact, simulation is probably the wrong word. The consciousness in such a scenario would be every bit as real as mine, but it would simply have an artificial origin. Mark my words. This century we will see The Sims in an entirely new light.Here's more food for thought: philosophers have been arguing for 20 years on the ethics of switching off any such artificially generated consciousnesses. Perhaps our world is the &quot;storage vessel&quot; for unused artificial simulations that an advanced race &quot;out there&quot; feels morally compelled to sustain. Or perhaps we exist in an automated perpetual simulation that has already outlived our creators.2old</blockquote>

[QUOTE="2old4this, post: 17785, member: 174998"] SETI does not ignore the time difference, which is why initial attempts centred on nearby stars. I think that obtaining proof of intelligent signals from another world would be a profound and defining moment for mankind. Establishing 2-way contact would be a separate step (and there are many in the SETI programme who believe that it would be a dangerous step to announce our presence). Back to the simulation - I am inclined to believe that we will in the future have developed computer modelling to such a degree of sophisication that we will easily be capable of running simulations at least as complex as our own world. With the advent of quantum computers on the horizon the possibility seems ever more real. Already today we are able to develop huge neural networks. If consciousness is an emergent property of complex systems (rather than some metaphysical phenomenon as the dualists believe) then we will undoubtedly soon be able to create (simulate?) consciousness. From such an entities's viewpoint with probably limited perspective and sensory input, it may well seem unthinkable that it could be simulated. In fact, simulation is probably the wrong word. The consciousness in such a scenario would be every bit as real as mine, but it would simply have an artificial origin. Mark my words. This century we will see The Sims in an entirely new light. Here's more food for thought: philosophers have been arguing for 20 years on the ethics of switching off any such artificially generated consciousnesses. Perhaps our world is the "storage vessel" for unused artificial simulations that an advanced race "out there" feels morally compelled to sustain. Or perhaps we exist in an automated perpetual simulation that has already outlived our creators. 2old [/QUOTE]

Verification