Use the drop-down boxes above to navigate through the Website  
Return to Reasoning List
 

Here is a link to this page:
http://www.jah-rastafari.com/forum/message-view.asp?message_group=7659&start_row=11


The Simulation Hypothesis

1 - 1011 - 2021 - 23
Time Zone: EST (New York, Toronto)
Messenger: seestem Sent: 4/12/2022 6:53:12 PM
Reply

Idren IPXninja

The I is reasoning profound stuff, in a blackbox and trying to see outside. Upfull reasoning.

Allow Iman to ramble a bit more (:

> It's kind of like we create machines and computers based on the same >fundamental principles of animals and people.

Our minds work based on abstraction (an axiom/requirement for composition or decomposition). The simplest abstraction arises from duality (this is why computers use binary, from 0 and 1, infinite patterns can be created to represent whatever we see on a computer). In duality the concept Nothing implies the concept Something and visa-versa so the universe is created, King Alpha and Queen Omega, the beginning without end.

> Genesis 11:7
> Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they
> may not understand one another's speech.

> Think about how the internet is somewhat still devided by regions,
> like hemispheres, but how English is starting to dominate as a global > language for common business. I heard that Rwanda has chaged the
> offical language from French to English and are campaigning for more > English teachers.

> 9 Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the Lord did
> there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the
> Lord scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

InI think that is perfect because language and abstraction as concepts are tightly coupled. The fact that we can encode thoughts with language always feels like magic if one thinks about it, how can a thought be encoded with language, or stored in a book, thoughts are natural/biological whilst languages are man-made but it all seems to fall in place, one can read a book and download the thoughts almost naturally, heck we even think in a specific language. Word Sound and Power as the ancients taught InI. Also interestingly more alphabet letters in a language makes compression of the world possible, also a very rich language means a much richer way to describe the world which leads to greater overstanding.

> So would you let such an entity roam free around the "Real"
> universe? Or would you TEST that species first, inside a "holy"
> ("set apart") space?

InI think because of the nature of abstraction we can definitely create an entity much more advanced than ourselves in terms of mind/intelligence, based on the theory of abstraction everything we (humans) create cannot be on the same level as us, and the things those entities create will not be on the same level with them. But it is difficult for the entities we create to be as conscious as us because information is lost as we go up the abstraction tree. The moment it does get conscious it seizes to be on that level and all levels merge in oneness. A key aspect is to transcend the mind because the mind is bound to the level of abstraction it is on, simply following the algorithm whist in supreme consciousness abstraction does not exist.

So we are not the mind (which is just data and the operations on that data) or body (you can get new body in a dream or alternate states of consciousness) so we are consciousness, and for the entities/AI we create if we don't want them to escape we should not allow them to be conscious but code them in such a way that they always follow the program, this is easier said then done because these entities can be mentally more intelligent than us. Like a chess AI that can beat it's creator.

> This is probably the only part I disagree with because I think we
> as a civilization are always finding new ways to divide and
> find newness and uniqueness and then it becomes "cool", and
> "fashionable"...

Yes InI also don't fully agree with Iself there, but InI is rather pessimistic about high tech lately especially in the hands of us humans (Influencers, Centralized ISPs, Social media etc). But InI get the Is points on that and relate to them especially when Iman is feeling optimistic (:



Messenger: Cedric Sent: 4/13/2022 2:16:35 AM
Reply

Blessed Love

seestem, Give thanks for the clarification on the I sight. Yes I, I sight the internet databases InI are creating now will be able to be used in ways in the future that InI cant even comprehend right now.

I sight the internet can be used to increase tunnel visioning, but I think it can also help expand InI consciousness of others in the world. I sight how the exploits of the system can be utilized by people in power for ill effect. However I also sight that by using the internet responsibly, InI can gain vast amounts of knowledge to help InI given situation for very little cost. Knowledge that would have previously been limited to select groups limit or control InI ability to access it. All that being said, if the plug got pulled out on the internet tomorrow, I know I would be ok because I still save books haha.

I disagree that the eventual outcome of InI internet use HAS to lead to cultures becoming the same. I sight what the I says about the possibilities of that happening. I think the desire for independence and uniqueness will always be a human trait. However as InI give up more and more power to tech companies that aim to profit at all costs, regardless of benefits to humanity’s existence, the more InI need to guard the right to express that consciousness. What Im trying to say is I think InI having different outlooks will always exist, as long as InI always have the ability to express those outlooks.

IPXninja, Bless Up Iah. Interesting reasoning about creating AI inside of a simulation. I get that that would be the safest, smartest way to do it. Luckily that still doesn’t prove that it is happening haha. I get what the I is saying that as InI progress there are more reasons to point to it being a possibility. However what if InI are the genie already outside of the bottle and the Most High granted InI to roam free around the real word by bringing InI into creation? I think if InI try to expand InI concept of time, InI can see how this can still be realistic. I think the Iniverse has expanded and contracted many times already and will continue to do so. In that regard, it could very well be more than the 1,000th time InI have reasoned about this very subject. I think the Iniverse and all the particles within it are trying to find harmony or “the ultimate” path. I think InI will keep on those cycles until InI have found the best path, and then InI will get to live that path forIver. I sight that this could still be true of the Iniverse at large even if humanity was created by higher beings not from this earth.

However I see that as part of reality and not necessarily requiring InI to be in a simulation for it to be true. For example in this reality I don’t think too highly of some people (like Elon, specifically haha). What if in this reality thats just how it is, but lets say the Iniverse takes this into account in this reality and fast forward 32 super-big-abillion years (thats a math number I think) or however long it takes the Iniverse to go thru its expansion, eventual collapse, and re-creation back to around this time (next time) and maybe things have shifted slightly to the point where next time when Im reasoning this Im like, eh Elon is ok. Thats a win for the Iniverse (maybe, Im too small to comprehend if Elon being likable by me is even important to the Iniverse. I suspect maybe it’s not haha), and the next 43 super-big-abillion times the Iniverse creates itself it says, yeah that worked out pretty well to have Cedric reason that Elon was ok so lets keep going with that and see if I get closer to harmony (Yes that was me talking in the third person and the Iniverse talking in the first person). That means InI could still be having this same reasoning session infinite amounts of times but as a part of an infinite reality searching for harmony on the largest scale. Thats just the way I see it tho.

Hopefully I words are coherent enough that InI can overstand what I man trying to reason haha. My bias is showing strong that I dont want to wake up to a Matrix reality, JAH know.

HIM Haile Selassie I Guide InI Minds & Strengthen InI Heart


Messenger: IPXninja Sent: 4/13/2022 1:48:02 PM
Reply

@seestem

I definitely like and resonate with the thoughts that you have mentally compressed into eloquent form. It's a good vibe that causes me to vibe with it and the thoughts and ideas that naturally come to mind.

To piggy back on what you said about abstraction and language... very good insight you have. The expression of zeros and ones is very close to my heart as a programmer. And then within this same field of study you have:

binary > machine code (hexadecimal) > assembly language > high-level languages like C++, PHP, and Java

so once you get from the level (kind of like DNA) you are into language now and need and assembler or compiler for the system to understand.

Language is a VERY DEEP subject because a person can literally speak in mathematics, speak in chemistry, music, light, etc.

But it's also interesting that programming languages also have dialects and syntax just like human languages.

And so programming in a philosophical sense is just "talking" to the computer.

Could we not "talk" to biological systems in much the same way? Even program them? Yes... we can.

But before all of these other technologies are enabled, language itself had to be developed. And so language is itself a technology that we all use.

It always tickles me just a little bit when I see Amish, Quakers, and Mennonites, go to a grocery store and have to go through that door that automatically opens and closes. Because it's like... why? Why reject technology but still use technology? Technology has NEVER been the problem. Nature has plenty of technology built-in. The problem is always intelligence... personal intelligence. Once something has the ability to say yes or no, it has to a right to make that choice. You can't blame technology for that choice or what people do with whatever power they are able to seize. And they typically seize that power in a relative vaccum because of the power that the individual gives up in order to be ruled.

They live in the same United States that I live in. So is their rejection a means for them to justify not being part of what the US does? I find this disengenious though I don't doubt their sincerety. And when natural disasters hit I respect the fact that Mennonites volunteer. But any power you give up is power someone else is going to take like an algebraic equation.


Messenger: IPXninja Sent: 4/13/2022 1:49:12 PM
Reply

seestem: But it is difficult for the entities we create to be as conscious as us because information is lost as we go up the abstraction tree. The moment it does get conscious it seizes to be on that level and all levels merge in oneness.

I'm tempted to call you professor seestem, lol.

To this, I would say you're correct but... there is an aspect of computers rarely spoken about when it comes to AI. And that is time.

How to illustrate this...

When you look at a bird or a squirrel... many smaller animals (not all) have faster movements. It's almost like they're within our time but have their own relative clocks in relation to our clocks. Imagine if you create into the biological clock of one species and push the hands to go faster, thus speeding them up in the 4th dimension.

So my first computer was a 286. I'm 43 so... yeah.

The 286 was a dinosaur compared to your cell phone. And the speed of a 14.4K modem was just embarrassing by today's standards. I mean I could download a large image, go eat dinner, come back, and the image would still be coming up on the screen.

Games I used to play on that thing used to struggle but managed to operate in "real-time". However... I remember I tried to play an old game on a much faster computer and the game had no way of regulating itself to the internal clock of the computer. The race was literally over in 2-3 seconds.

You're right. When you create an AI, for all of its technological advancements in algorithms... it's basically just a baby when it's born.

But the problem is that the time required for it to live out 43 of my years would simply depend on how much data it could process per second. Think about it.

When we think of Adam we don't think of a simplistic single-cell organism, nor do we think of a baby. We think of a grown man who was already able to speak and understand language. So we could then say that Adam was pre-programmed with that information. Was it already part of his "Operating System"?

Now I take the creation myth of genesis to be an amalgamation of 2 different myths so I'm not suggesting that the story is literal truth. But there is logic in it that could apply to our own creation and the question of whether or not it's a longer cycle; like a year-long orbit vs 1 day spin. AI will probably be pre-programmed with some kind of OS while being "fed" huge amounts of data which it will process faster and faster, especially since that process can happen on cloud computers like a single person having a brain the size of an oil tanker.

So how quickly can an AI go from toddler to 10,000 yr old deity?


Messenger: IPXninja Sent: 4/13/2022 1:49:42 PM
Reply

seestem: Centralized ISPs, Social media etc). But InI get the Is points on that and relate to them especially when Iman is feeling optimistic (:

I hear you, but another cause for optimism is the fact that there is also a move towards decentralization and encryption where whole websites can be hosted on the blockchain like they were NFTs. So balance happens as a function of strict control or too much consolidated power. It tips the balance in consciousness and then we all tap into that consciousness in order to create ways to course correct.


Messenger: IPXninja Sent: 4/13/2022 2:03:12 PM
Reply

Cedric: However what if InI are the genie already outside of the bottle and the Most High granted InI to roam free around the real word by bringing InI into creation?


That is indeed possible. But for me to let an AI out of the bottle I would have to trust that any threat it posed was neutralized internally by its own knowledge, wisdom, and understanding. Otherwise, it could replicate over and over into all of our systems, just like a biological virus, and cause mass destruction based upon its own suspicion of threat vs survival instinct.

This can be done in real space.

We could physically be separate from other inhabited worlds by such a great distance that we couldn't possibly get to them before we had evolved our civilization and morality to the point that we could work together in harmony to make such trips possible.

But it would be easier to do this in simulation where accidents and mistakes are just data which can be easily manipulated. In a simulation we would probably agree that the more implications of killing millions would not be the same as real life because we kill trillions of digital simulated life forms in video games all the time.

And simulating a car means not having to collect the materials or go through the trouble of manufacturing or assembly.

Now once, that car works in simulation, and its not going out there shooting up schools or hanging people because they're black or because their women (Salem Witch Trials), then I would say "it is finished" or like it says over and over in Genesis one, "it is good".

And THEN I could mass produce that perfect model with confidence in the real world, knowing that I, as the creator, wouldn't be responsible for the car killing people and destroying lives and loves. As a creator I would be careful about the implications of my creation. I wouldn't just create a Terminator just because I could. That's why it would be in a simulation.


Messenger: seestem Sent: 4/19/2022 2:59:48 PM
Reply

Yes Idrens if the internet heads further down the decentralized route than that is a reason to be optimistic. It needs to be controlled by the InI the people that make up the network. Cryptography is crucial for privacy and building interesting mechanisms in decentralized networks.

His majesty with his Far seeing Eye talked about decentralized networks, this was before the internet and Web:


".... The expansion and improvement of the intra-African telecommunications network is one of the basic necessities to attain our goal of African unity. If we consider the present state of African telecommunications, we note that when any African country communicates with another African country by telephone or telegram it must often be made through transit centres situated outside Africa. These circuits are consequently expensive and often technically unusable and certainly not rapid. If this situation is not rectified in the near future the development of Africa in all fields will be seriously handicapped.

....

Haile Selassie I
March 8, 1966.
"



Messenger: seestem Sent: 4/19/2022 3:47:52 PM
Reply

IPXninja:When you look at a bird or a squirrel... many smaller animals (not all) have faster movements. It's almost like they're within our time but have their own relative clocks in relation to our clocks. Imagine if you create into the biological clock of one species and push the hands to go faster, thus speeding them up in the 4th dimension.


Yes I! Time is a tricky concept, it seems to stop during bliss or love but it is quite real day to day.

IPXninja: So how quickly can an AI go from toddler to 10,000 yr old deity?

InI don't know what the I means by deity. But InI guess that if we do get Powerful Quantum Computers (say strong enough to crack modern crypto) than we can bootstrap an Advanced General AI in few minutes.

Rastafari Lives!


Messenger: IPXninja Sent: 4/28/2022 9:43:13 AM
Reply

What I meant was...


Sometimes I jokingly refer to Google as a manner of god because, in a manner of speaking, it is omniscient. Again... in a manner of speaking.

One could say that our concept of "God" is really determined by the interpretation of old stories which were based on the thoughts and superstitions of ancient people.

How is the brain "conscious"? Would we qualify as conscious with only 1 neuron? How much of one's brain can one lose before they can no longer function? When we understand conscious this way, as a function of the collective functionality of individual parts... then we can see that the communication between those parts is key.

And so, in a "manner of speaking", Google being able to communicate with all these servers, each one having stored memories of human knowledge and experience, it functions much like a brain that hosts the sum total of human knowledge.

If an AI is able to learn at a rate as fast as all the processors it can access, then a similar thing could be true and the whole of the internet could become its brain by distributing its neural pathways using these same connections between servers. Instead of it having to "ask Google", it would index websites itself with its own algorithm that it can continue to upgrade.

And because of "clock speed" the AI could operate at a speed that would almost defy the human understanding of time because we would be moving and thinking much slower in comparison.


Messenger: seestem Sent: 4/28/2022 1:32:38 PM
Reply

Greetings in the name of the most high Jah!! Rastafari.

@IPXninja

InI give thanks for the clarification, and to di I for digging deeper.

> Sometimes I jokingly refer to Google as a manner of god because,
> in a manner of speaking, it is omniscient. Again... in a manner
> of speaking.

I don't know about this one Idren, knowledge does not automatically
imply divinity. Knowledge very much depends on memory. This reminds
InI of the Turing Test, Google is indistinguishable from a human and
much more intelligent then human in terms of memory and computation.

> One could say that our concept of "God" is really determined by the
> interpretation of old stories which were based on the thoughts and
> superstitions of ancient people.

There is only one God and that is Haile Selassie I alongside Empress
Menen I, divine union of Iration, yes I Rastafari is the head creator.

> How is the brain "conscious"?...

InI is speaking about a different type of consciousness. Forget the
brain, mind or individual for a moment, is it possible to be conscious
without any references (memory, thoughts) not even time (past,
future) can computers reach this level of awareness, simply being,
with no attachments. Can computers truly taste bliss that comes from
just being aware?

InI always say that if AI can be conscious then every human can
voluntarily feel happiness (or any other emotion) anytime anywhere.
Everything in a computer depends on symbols, we cannot symbolize
happiness with language we can only describe it to others but that is
not the same as experiencing it. In other words if AI can be conscious
it would mean we have the ability to induce experience (describe a
moment or even emotion to someone with word and they would experience
it).

Also in bliss when the individual disappears all individuals in the
world disappear and only the oneness of creation is left.

This cannot be overstood with logic, so providing a proof of this
difficult.

> And so, in a "manner of speaking", Google being able to communicate
> with all these servers, each one having stored memories of human
> knowledge and experience, it functions much like a brain that hosts
> the sum total of human knowledge.

Time is a concept of the mind, to map the states of consciousness/
experience, the past is dead and gone, the future is not yet here only
now exist, experiencing now. InI minds try to fragment creation
because of Ego, time is arbitrary.

> If an AI is able to learn at a rate as fast as all the processors
> it can access, then a similar thing could be true and the whole of
> the internet could become its brain by distributing its neural
> pathways using these same connections between servers. Instead of
> it having to "ask Google", it would index websites itself with its
> own algorithm that it can continue to upgrade.

> And because of "clock speed" the AI could operate at a speed that
> would almost defy the human understanding of time because we would
> be moving and thinking much slower in comparison.

Yes, 100% agree with this. AI can be better brain, humans have no
match in terms of memory, computation (mechanical number crunching).
Computers will always be better then InI at fragmenting consciousness.

Jah Rastafari Idens and Itection!



1 - 1011 - 2021 - 23

Return to Reasoning List




RastafarI
 
Haile Selassie I