What is easier to create a paradise for one or for all?

Submitted by Thiccboifentalin t3_10gsgl6 in singularity

If we could create a full dive VR where every fantasy sick or tame you would have could come true, you still would need other people to give you a reaction. You can't do everything that you want in real life due to the resource limitations or body limitations.

So picture this, people that are plugged in to the VR experience realities in which they exceed others and these “dummies” pretending to be real people with boring lives or bad jobs give YOU a sense of superiority, jobbers as they are called in wrestling. VR simulation creates just enough tensions to keep you on edge with all the close calls and problems that you overcome in the most unexpected of ways.

So in that instance, why get a plastic surgery or change too many things in the real world? In which many things are simply fixed when you can do so much more in VR that would require less time and more results.

What do you think?

11

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

just-a-dreamer- t1_j54kfg8 wrote

I would leave the physical world instantly if that was possible without dying. Machines can have it.

That will be a long way to go though. When there is a technology that keeps the body alive while we are off dreaming whatever we want, I'll take that.

13

Cr4zko t1_j54iw9m wrote

I mean yeah you're pretty much right. FDVR would be the way to live the cool fantasy life you'd like and pretty much anything in between if you get sick of it. Of course making it a reality is something else altogether. I don't think we can do it on our own and may need AGI to help us.

9

Zermelane t1_j562q6r wrote

I like your mentality, OP. I have absolutely no idea how it works and I think I disagree with it on a really fundamental level, but it's at least very different from the usual redditor fare, and it's making me think really damn hard.

> they exceed others and these “dummies” pretending to be real people with boring lives or bad jobs give YOU a sense of superiority, jobbers as they are called in wrestling

I think you are overestimating how much people think about each other's lives.

I can see humans retreating into video games for other reasons, like, maybe you want to be able to hit on anyone and always be accepted or something. But purely to see other people have sadder lives than you? No, that in itself isn't a fantasy that I've ever seen video games sell. A better, more significant life than you have right now, absolutely, but not comparing your character to NPCs.

But okay, you sure do mow down a lot of mooks in some games, and that means that your life is clearly more important than theirs. Fair enough: A multiplayer game where one player is the hero and the others are grunts that go down in a few seconds wouldn't be very interesting.

... and I guess I'll grant you that. I'd have to do some work to probe out the distinction to really figure out the difference, but I do think it's there. Well. At least now, Maybe future video game technology will change what experiences are fun, and it turns out that people do enjoy games where they compare themselves to NPCs with shitty jobs.

3

Thiccboifentalin OP t1_j5688v8 wrote

> like your mentality, OP. I have absolutely no idea how it works and I think I disagree with it on a really fundamental level, but it's at least very different from the usual redditor fare, and it's making me think really damn hard.
>
>they exceed others and these “dummies” pretending to be real people with boring lives or bad jobs give YOU a sense of superiority, jobbers as they are called in wrestling
>
>I think you are overestimating how much people think about each other's lives.
>
>I can see humans retreating into video games for other reasons, like, maybe you want to be able to hit on anyone and always be accepted or something. But purely to see other people have sadder lives than you? No, that in itself isn't a fantasy that I've ever seen video games sell. A better, more significant life than you have right now, absolutely, but not comparing your character to NPCs.
>
>But okay, you sure do mow down a lot of mooks in some games, and that means that your life is clearly more important than theirs. Fair enough: A multiplayer game where one player is the hero and the others are grunts that go down in a few seconds wouldn't be very interesting.
>
>... and I guess I'll grant you that. I'd have to do some work to probe out the distinction to really figure out the difference, but I do think it's there. Well. At least now, Maybe future video game technology will change what experiences are fun, and it turns out that people do enjoy games where they compare themselves to NPCs with shitty jobs.

Thank you for hearing me out.

I believe my writings are a coping mechanism I have developed, it is nothing more than a manic episode at heart really to keep myself occupied in case I would try to commit suicide, I live in Ukraine and the thought of wasting my ears and not achieving optimal potential is a torture to me.

I like to believe that some people truly are happy, and I'm just a background character. Beautiful people with beautiful ideas, and that one day I too could exist in such reality through VR.

But my health is not in great SHAPE and perhaps if I treat myself this idea this post will become irrelevant.

2

No_Ninja3309_NoNoYes t1_j55ex71 wrote

In theory if VR arrives with AGI or something that is good enough, I think I will be too old to enjoy it. Unless theoretically science can 'fix' me. This makes your scenario pretty unlikely for me.

You can argue that we already live in societies where no one is 'real'. Everyone plays a role except around friends and family. But you can't control that reality like VR, right?

The problem is that we don't know who will create VR and how. Maybe like OpenAI and other technology companies they would force their moral values on us. Perhaps they will limit the VR products to something tame.

But personally, if I had the choice, I would go for the wildest dreams. With flying, magic, and interstellar travel. I don't really understand why that would be bad, unless we are talking about the load on the computing infrastructure.

2

Thiccboifentalin OP t1_j55fnog wrote

What about a memory wipe that would make all of your experience feel you just have been born again?

Would that make VR interesting as 50 or 60-year-old something human?

3

turnip_burrito t1_j54ix6t wrote

Because as a matter of subjective opinion, some people might want it to be real, not simulated. That's all.

1

Thiccboifentalin OP t1_j54lnvg wrote

How do you know if it's real?

Like I get that the world is limiting, and all that, but maybe we are just in a far shittier simulation?

Like this earth 1.0 and another is like 2.0 where we can fly and stuff.

Again, I believe it's about perceived pleasure and hierarchy that one occupies in the society. If you are of lower classes escapism is key if you are of higher classes then your servants have limitations as well, it seems that VR could bring benefits to both parties.

3

turnip_burrito t1_j54msg5 wrote

Maybe, but if they believe it's the real world, then that's what matters to them. It is also more real because the machinery running the VR world is built within it.

Also the simulation hypothesis is unfalsifiable, so not particularly any more or less helpful than asking questions like "what if dying sends our souls to heaven" or "what if food is actually magic but undetectable drugs and I'm hallucinating my life".

3

GayHitIer t1_j54mcnz wrote

I don't think pure hedonism is good for anyone.

I would live with others in the real or digital world.

Would get boring to live in a perfect hedonistic world.

1

Thiccboifentalin OP t1_j54mgvv wrote

What’s your social position in life? Got good mental health and money, well, others don’t. Your stability is based on the instability of others.

4

GayHitIer t1_j54mo16 wrote

I just think you can't have good without some bad, a pure hedonistic world would be a euphemism for suicide in my opinion, we exist with good and bad.

We have good days and we have bad days, only having the good is bad.

Doesn't matter social class or who you are, we humans are build upon a world of chaos.

1

GayHitIer t1_j54mrql wrote

I watched Neon Genesis Evangelion where NERV, basically wanted a perfect world where they merged everyone, while it seems like heaven the whole concept is euphemism for suicide.

1

Thiccboifentalin OP t1_j54o0hi wrote

You don't get it. We are talking about a world with flaws where you are desired and perceived as valuable.

You don't get the one tenth of fame and fortune that certain people get.

So instead of wishing for constant pleasure as you put it, why not create a world that is flawed, terrible even and make yourself the “one”.

Video games and films follow the same logic, it's not about fairness, it's about being a head of the curve.

4

Cr4zko t1_j54qum1 wrote

You could balance the world out the same way a game like Fallout is balanced. There you go.

2

Thiccboifentalin OP t1_j54r91p wrote

You kill far more foes in Fallout than they kill you. You are infinitely more important than some other NPCs.

John Wick does more harm than done to him.

Some people have more success than others with no drawbacks.

It's all about the non player characters and the role they play in the story for you or our entertainment, just like it is a hierarchy in real life.

Think of the philosophical zombie. They say that they fell pleasure, you believe them and that gives pleasure to you while in reality they felt nothing just like the programming intended.

3

Cr4zko t1_j54rkgw wrote

That is true, but this mainly happens because of limitations in their respective media formats. If you were to simulate an entire world it would be pretty easy to make the player just another schmuck in a long line of schmucks. The advantages are up to you.

1

Thiccboifentalin OP t1_j54rvez wrote

Well, give an option and we will make a conclusion. If I want Gothic or Skyrim. Or what about adjusted difficulty slider that you are not aware of ? Some people call it God's plan, so why rationalize it like that?

3

just-a-dreamer- t1_j54su0n wrote

That's the point.

Become god in your own realm and rule as you see fit.

3

Thiccboifentalin OP t1_j54sxw5 wrote

Now you are talking my language, brotendo.

You want his this ranch?

You need to get dyson spherical instead of ray kurzwelian my fucking mulatto.

1

GayHitIer t1_j54rgh3 wrote

I will give you right in a world that could better than it is right now, though I would like a world where both sides would exist with other people, sure I agree that some people live unfair lives in this world no denying that, but that world is who makes us who we are. Myself have been bullied through my childhood with a poor drug addicted mom who never cared for same with my dad, of course I would have been better off with perfect parents, but that wouldn't be me.

We just have to be careful for what we wish for.

1

Thiccboifentalin OP t1_j54shfb wrote

What are the benefits of this "me"?

You define your world through suffering and scarcity, and when something good happens, you either become arrogant or afraid of taking it in?

What is the value of your face or ideas if it is just a select combination of phenotypes and ideas that you heard from a friend or family member.

And don't get me started on the prenatal development that you can't even alter because your consciousness has not yet developed.

So I ask again, why stay in this preplanned life when you could give in to the possibility of something far more flexible?

2

Mortal-Region t1_j56lpjd wrote

Well, everyone wants to be impressive. But if the people you interact with are non-conscious NPCs, you're not making any impression at all. That's not more results, that's less results.

1

tokkkkaaa t1_j584yay wrote

I’d like to share the fake memories with real friends and family in coop mode at least.

I don‘t know if I could live a happy life knowing that absolutely no one except me was real. I‘d need some kind of real life companionship.

1