What are /x/'s thoughts on the simulation hypothesis put forward by Nick Bostrom? I don't believe it myself but it actually makes a lot of sense to me.
The more terrifying thing to ponder in my opinion is what if you are the sole purpose of the entire simulation. Everything and everyone around you is simulated but you are real.
For reference:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis
Every generation ontologically associates with the prevailing technological epoch.
>Fire universe
>Clockwork universe
>Atomic universe
>The universe is a computer
Sorry, kiddo. You're conscious of your surroundings, which is more than most, but you're just not The One.
>>17719271
Could you explain a bit further?
I ve had these thoughts a lot when I was younger... them I somehow shift to the theory outlined in The Egg pasta.. google it if you dont know it, its worth it.
>>17719287
What more is there to say? AI is the next big epoch so naturally everyone assumes the universe is a simulation. A few years later we'll think the universe is a teleporter or something. Screencaps this
>>17719293
Damn it kind of just blew my mind. Beautifully written too.
The genetic code is literally a code-script. It's rarely mentioned on these threads. The universe also has a "refresh rate", a planck length of time.
Add to this the fact that reality is subjective, informational and bound by set rules makes things start to appear pretty "computerised".
There also exists a mechanism which prevents contradictions in reality that we cannot explain. A "hidden rule" if you will. When we attempt to "trick" reality and peer behind the curtain it literally pops up and says "Nope, fuck you I changed state before you looked.".
Information travels instantly between entangled particles, regardless of distance.
