/explore
|
You are here 
|
www.lesswrong.com | ||
| | | | |
reducing-suffering.org
|
|
| | | | | ||
| | | | |
philpapers.org
|
|
| | | | | [AI summary] The provided text is a collection of various academic and philosophical works, including journal articles, essays, and book preprints, covering topics such as cosmology, the philosophy of science, the anthropic principle, and the fine-tuning argument. It includes discussions on the structure of the universe, the nature of time, and the role of consciousness in science. There are also mentions of specific authors and their contributions to these fields, as well as some critiques of Bayesian reasoning and anthropic arguments. The text also contains some personal reflections and opinions on current scientific and philosophical debates. | |
| | | | |
www.greaterwrong.com
|
|
| | | | | Followup to: Anthropic Reasoning in UDT by Wei Dai Suppose that I flip a logical coin - e.g. look at some binary digit of pi unknown to either of us - and depending on the result, either create a billion of you in green rooms and one of you in a red room if the coin came up 1; or, if the coin came up 0, create one of you in a green room and a billion of you in red rooms. You go to sleep at the start of the experiment, and wake up in a red room. Do you reason that the coin very probably came up 0? Thinking, perhaps: "If the coin came up 1, there'd be a billion of me in green rooms and only one of me in a red room, and in that case, it'd be very surprising that I found myself in a red room." | |
| | | | |
magnusvinding.com
|
|
| | | The following is a point-by-point critique of Lukas Gloor's essay Altruists Should Prioritize Artificial Intelligence. My hope is that this critique will serve to make it clear - to Lukas, myself, and others - where and why I disagree with this line of argument, and thereby hopefully also bring some relevant considerations to the table... | ||
