Submitted by h20ohno t3_yqc8kf in singularity
Redvolition t1_ivrcvmq wrote
For a digital existence to be possible, you either would need an isolated brain, for which the body has been discarded, or a fully uploaded mind, in which we left the organic substrate altogether in favor of a synthetic one. A virtual world in which your body is kept around and taken care by a support machine does not seem feasible to me, as there are too many points of failure, from diseases, to aging, and muscular atrophy. A single isolated brain connected to an artificial support, on the other hand, seems far more feasible.
For there to be an UBI, there needs to be scarcity of basic needs. In all likelihood, there won't be anything truly essential and scarse that one or a group of humans can offer to others in exchange for money, considering all brains will already be able to generate whatever they want and imagine on their own system. However, assuming there still is a differential in intelligence, the most capable minds will congregate to advance the technological dependencies that everyone relies on, such as the world generators, brain support machines, artificial reproduction pipelines, exowombs, energy supplies, longevity treatments, molecule builders, etc. They will be compensated by their efforts via having access to the latest technologies first, whereas everyone else will simply wait until it is made available for them. Only a minority of highly gifted brains will participate in the economy and be producers of technology, whereas everyone else will simply be consumers.
This is assuming we achieve brain isolation after AGI, but before ASI, which is not necessarily going to be the case. If we reach ASI first, then there will be no human producers in the first place and, if mind upload is possible, it will be readily achievable by the ASI. An independent and well aligned ASI will likely make the whole notion of a market economy obsolete. Everyone will simply live in their own worlds or cross over to other people’s worlds and public realms. Some will fully retreat and never interact with other humans again, whereas others will constantly congregate with their previous family and friends.
I don’t know much about neurobiology, but I believe there are limitations to how much pleasure an individual can induce before reaching several forms of neurological damage and intrinsic limits. So it might be the case that simply bombarding yourself with pleasure chemicals is not going to work, and a more natural distribution of positive and negative emotion, resembling our present reality, will still be necessary for self-preservation. Even though isolated brains won’t be able to have endless chemically induced orgasms and serotonin overloads, the lows of poverty, disease, anxiety and depression will just cease to exist.
h20ohno OP t1_ivrgyxf wrote
Awesome points, to add to your last paragraph, perhaps you could form some sort of contract or agreement with a third party (Maybe an AGI guardian) to essentially lock you in a particular VR world for a time, so you're forced to deal with the challenges in a way that keeps you mentally developing, like a training course for being a stable and balanced human being.
Redvolition t1_ivrj8x1 wrote
I always thought the best argument for why we are not living in a simulation is that it would have been a senselessly gruesome and suboptimal one, with an abundance of negative emotion.
You just made me think that maybe our current world is a first run of the simulation just after we are born, so that we fully develop and mature into functioning adults, before being revealed that, in fact, we are isolated brains kept on artificial support machines.
Just imagine that when you reach 50 years old or whatever, you go to sleep one day and wake up in a white room full of people looking at you, and one of them speaks:
- Welcome, anon, you concluded your maturation successfuly, now you will be introduced to the real world.
Everyone around us is just either a simulated philosophical zombie, or other humans in the maturation run, and everyone above 50 or so is an NPC acting as a placeholder for somebody tha already matured and left the first simulation.
h20ohno OP t1_ivro728 wrote
That's an interesting way of seeing the simulation hypothesis.
A crazy idea I had could be that technological progress is a way of gradually acclimating the trainee to the digital era in a way that doesn't shock them, and maybe you could run people in different eras to produce diverse outcomes in mindsets, someone who 'graduates' training in the 1800's would see things different to someone from 2020.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments