I really enjoyed this conversation with Nick. Here's the outline: 0:00 - Introduction 2:48 - Simulation hypothesis and simulation argument 12:17 - Technologically mature civilizations 15:30 - Case 1: if something kills all possible civilizations 19:08 - Case 2: if we lose interest in creating simulations 22:03 - Consciousness 26:27 - Immersive worlds 28:50 - Experience machine 41:10 - Intelligence and consciousness 48:58 - Weighing probabilities of the simulation argument 1:01:43 - Elaborating on Joe Rogan conversation 1:05:53 - Doomsday argument and anthropic reasoning 1:23:02 - Elon Musk 1:25:26 - What's outside the simulation? 1:29:52 - Superintelligence 1:47:27 - AGI utopia 1:52:41 - Meaning of life
Really enjoyed this episode and came to the conclusion that an AGI utopia would consist of a perfect balance of all outcomes reguardless of the metric.What good are the highs without the lows?
Alessandro Filippi Yes but the question is what happens when masturbation is indistinguishable or even preferrable to real sex? And not even just in the sense that it is more enjoyable, but possibly even in being more meaningful and fulfilling. Or what if the use of simulated experience in and of itself create a better model of reality in any number of ways?
They skipped one very convincing illustration of the simulation argument. In the event there is one single simulation running anywhere in the universe at any point in time what do we conclude? Given there exists two realities in this scenario there is a 50% chance we are the simulation. The probability rises from there. Another notable point seldom discussed it number of simulations is the stronger argument relative to number of humans. As a near cost abstraction total population can be infinite where population that has experiences and memories ranges from one to N plus the low resolution model of the universe. There is more.
This guy is my new favorite interviewer. He is great to listen to if you want to really follow every word or just some bits and pieces while you fall asleep. His pace and tone are absolutely wonderful to hear. He allows the guest talk and then asks pertinent questions. Most excellent job. Thank you!
Nick Bostrom has pioneered so many concepts that we now realize are crucial (existential risks, superintelligence, instrumental convergence...). I would love to see him distill his deep insights on AI in a second round!
Exactly. I get Lex want to talk with a lot of people in different areas, but what he can do better than most, is having hopefully high and even higher level conversations about computational topics.
This and Jim Keller. I loved the dynamic of a brilliant engineer and a brilliant research scientist with overlapping fields of focus riffing witty banter off each other. I had a raging brainer watching that one.
No, this is the guest we subbed for, since he's the one with the Sim hypothesis Lex questions a lot of his guests around. But to him, Lex was just setting firm ground and enumerating definitions, the conversation didn't really take off far from there at all. I was really disappointed with the shallowness to which this podcast persisted. Lex could've also discussed a lot of his thoughts to him for an interdisciplinary discourse. I am just hoping for a follow up with Bostrom , which delves much deeper than his books and papers most of which I've already read and opens up avenues for new grand questions and perspectives
This is the sole interview that has me listening to lex fridman as much as I can to this day. It’s the first time I ever discovered who he was and it doesn’t matter who he interviews, he’s always as genuine as one could be. Watching his podcasts are always a breath of fresh air.
Lex, I wanted to take a moment to thank you for posting your interview with Bostrom. I would have never had access to that information or dialogue on my own, so I wanted very much to complement the work your are doing and the effort you put forth.
You could measure the speed of light from how fast I clicked on this. Lex you are the premier intellectual interviewer of this generation. Phenomenal individual & good hearted human
Lex your channel is truly amazing, thank you so much for your work man! In 4 days I'm going to graduate with a thesis about AI and I'm learning so so much thanks to your work, every video you post is a masterpiece, beautiful and easy to follow. In time, I hope to become a professor myself and teach philosophy of technology at University. Thank you again, you are an exemple and people like you make RUclips the wonderful thing it is
Just make sure to understand well and teach and incorporate the fact of Energy, Minerals, and Resource Blinders that have been worn by most humans for the last few or more generations, i.e., that Biophysical Realities are ignored by virtually ALL economists, financiers, engineers, builders, manufacturers, distributors, and EVEN consumers. Re: The Great Simplification by Dr. Nate Hagens et al. CUZ, we're continuing to ignore THIS very much to our own peril namely collectively as a kind of Super-Organism -- which is the entirety of Humanity, not unlike a speeding train without a conductor AND it's literally running out of track on a finite planet that's ALREADY hit or crossed over 30 planetary boundaries, LIMITS, as well as being past PEAK on MANY things, WHILE still others have been so depleted to dangerously low levels as to make it feasible for most people on Earth to be facing a very MUCH lessier LESS future in the next few decades since materials and energies inputs and THROUGHPUTS will have been completely exhausted. If we don't ACTUALLY get that sh-tuff down AND fully understood NOW, then we truly are on not ONLY a self limiting trajectory BUT rather we are on a self terminating course: think Easter Island and countless other civilizations societies and cultures that have gone extinct or into collapse over the last severa dozen eons. Without the Bio Physical Reality of resources, there's just ZERO phukken way to science or tech or Hope-ium our way outa this our current Human Predicament.
Thank you for this exciting conversation! Especially the quote at the very end 1:55:50 : "Our approach to existential risks can not be one of trail and error. There's no opportunity to learn from errors. The reactive approach […] is unworkable. Rather, we must take a proactive approach. This requires foresight to anticipate new types of threats and a willingness to take decisive preventative action and to bear the costs, moral and economic, of such actions." Nick Bostrom Being able to adapt into a society of that sort may very well be the decider whether we hit an early filter or not.
Today, I was jogging at 6.2 speed with no incline on a treadmill. The treadmill suddenly, and unexpectedly, COMPLETELY STOPPED. I was shocked when I looked down and saw the motionless belt. Incredibly, both my feet had stopped also. I felt frozen in place. I had zero loss of balance, or any forward momentum. That exact moment didn't feel real. It was a moment of extreme fear, relief, and amazement. How could I react so quickly without notice? I'm 66 years old, and spend a lot of hours on the treadmill. I primarily speed walk at 4.5 speed, and occasionally jog at 6.2, and sprint at 8.2. I average 45 minutes of duration. Today I had been on the treadmill for just over an hour. I constantly vary my speed, cadence and stride and believe I'm always in total control. I've treadmilled 60+ miles in a day and have published a few posts explaining how I feel a connection between my brain, body, and the treadmill. My focus is locked into a spot on the treadmill headboard throughout my sessions. I'm constantly focused on stride symmetry. This extreme level of focus was perpetuated by my skeletal imbalance. I'm missing a significant part of my shoulder blade due to a jaw transplant. I wouldn't dare consider reinacting what happened today. It doesn't seem physically possible for me to stop simultaneously with the treadmill,and have no loss of balance or feel any forward momentum. Can someone explain how this would support the simulation argument? That moment was the most unreal moment of my life. The next closest were two near death experiences.
Was anticipating Bostrom's presence on this podcast since an eon. I appreciate the amount of time spent setting clear definitions and enumerating hypotheses but I honestly hoped that this conversation would've delved much deeper and would've generated many more grand open questions for everyone, including both of them. Since Lex has always been asking the question of simulations to interested guests, I am just assuming that there will be a further follow-up podcast with Nick which will commence from where you don't have to establish firm ground. And also that Lex will impart some accessible insights from his research to the guests so that their thinking can be more inter-disciplinary leading to generation of even greater holistic ideas.
gee I hope Lex don't invite or talk to this sad goof ever again! his imagination is so child like and under developed it made me question my subscription to this podcast! hopefully Lex's other guests are quite scientific and intelligent but this overwhelmed glass goof with his imaginary civilizations and dreams of disconnecting from reality just makes me cringe so hard to the point I just can't finish watching this...
@@arasharshadi5009 "gee I hope" you're kidding or maybe have really a lot of guts to judge the intelligence of a celebrated Oxford professor. He's also the author of the bestselling book "Superintelligence", which sparked an era of AGI Safety that Lex Fridman himself followed, and it will continue to be the most important discussion and research area in this century. He also formulated the Simulation hypothesis which Lex seems to be questioning about to almost every other guest, so in most ways, Nick Bostrom is an inspiration to Lex and a million others. And please develop some abstract and philosophical thinking capabilities, Science has always been closely intertwined with these fundamentals. AI Safety, ethics, morality will indeed require ideas from all fields.
@@arasharshadi5009 I agree...who IS this silly man? Most comments make me wonder who people are trying to impress. Hopefully Lex will forget another interview with this chaotic mind.
You have the nicest and most honest introduction you always use - I never skip around in your talks bc you never randomly break the flow to plug something. You're appreciated! Thanks for that and the content. Be it Chomsky, Vitalik, Tegmark... so on and so forth.
The host is doing a decent job of trying to keep the discussion grownded in reality, without being condacending. The guest undermined in argument by saying one has to make the large assumption that thus is a simulation, that's an appeal to ignorance. The thing is, wither or not our reality is a simulation, that is a different topic from the developing if super intellegence. So, the guest has tossed in a red harring or straw man, as he switches from discussing things being a simulation to talking about A.I. and artificial super intellegence. Two different topics.
I have never heard anybody explaining clearly the argument (''at least one of these three propositions is true...). It never goes beyond: '' there is a logical possibility that...''; which amount to '' We could be in a dream...''. And obviously there is no need of a computer scientist to conceive such a thing...
Wow! Nick Bostrom is remarkably intelligent and articulate while also being fairly humble and self-aware of the grandiosity of his theory. Loved the conversation! Thank you, @Lex Fridman for making this happen. Your channel is fantastic.
I really enjoyed this conversation with Nick. Here's the outline: 0:00 - Introduction 2:48 - Simulation hypothesis and simulation argument 12:17 - Technologically mature civilizations 15:30 - Case 1: if something kills all possible civilizations 19:08 - Case 2: if we lose interest in creating simulations 22:03 - Consciousness 26:27 - Immersive worlds 28:50 - Experience machine 41:10 - Intelligence and consciousness 48:58 - Weighing probabilities of the simulation argument 1:01:43 - Elaborating on Joe Rogan conversation 1:05:53 - Doomsday argument and anthropic reasoning 1:23:02 - Elon Musk 1:25:26 - What's outside the simulation? 1:29:52 - Superintelligence 1:47:27 - AGI utopia 1:52:41 - Meaning of life
Don’t sell out Lex, you are very much needed to bridge the Laymen with the academics. You will have one of the biggest channels in the near future, you are a teacher of teachers🇬🇧👊🏼
I can honestly say this was one of the most awesome discussions i have ever listened to in my life. Lex has this incredible ability to ask the perfect questions to allow us to get a glimpse into the minds of these geniuses.
Most difficult book I've ever read, and yet the most rewarding at the same time. I'm not a programmer, or educated in the sciences, or in philosophy for that matter, yet I enjoyed it enormously. I highly recommend it.
o g It’s a tough read. Very technical. Bostrom has said himself that even though it turned out to be a best seller he didn’t write it with a mainstream audience in mind.
@@ashaki4795 I have the book and I feel like it's a type of book that you don't have to read from beginning to end. You can just pick out parts that you like/can understand can skip the parts you don't. I wonder if you read it btw, since you posted these comments 4 and 5 months ago.
I love the final question; the meaning of life. This got me thinking that perhaps “life” is the game or space we find ourselves in and hence the best answer I can come up with would be, and not glibly, “to get through it as best we can”, with ‘best’ being a more universal connotation. We find ourselves here, there is no choice... so “keep walking” and make it meaningful...
Just finished reading "Superintelligence" by Nick Bostrom and a day later this video pops up! Never clicked a noti faster in my entire life! Also how would we ever know when we've finally hit "bedrock" reality? like you said in an earlier video, it's always possible that the creators hard coded some proofs so that no conscious agent could escape the simulation..
@@MalcolmsShow It's not AGI in effect. We haven't reached AGI yet and at this very moment, it is impossible to achieve. What Fortnite King isn't understanding is that when you buy the book, the data from the bookstore and/or your credit card company (depending on how you paid for the book) is sold to Google whose software will then start to add related videos to your suggested videos list. It's not coincidental nor is it AGI.
@@GeeTBase Sentient AI has existed for over a decade, & sentient AGI has existed for years, just because you aren't aware of it doesn't mean it doesn't exist...
@@MalcolmsShow No Malcom, that is actually incorrect. Neither sentient AI or AGI exists. It's not a matter of me being aware of it or not, it's simply a current limitation of mankind and our technology. That's not to say it will never exist, it may, one day, just not right now. You might be defining sentience or the actual terms of "Sentient AI" and "AGI" as something different than what they are, but feel free to do any amount of research that you want. These are things that people are trying to work toward achieving, but we can't even come close since we don't actually know how the human brain works.
I'm going to watch this with my coffee, first thing in the morning. The Matrix is in sync with me. Literally yesterday I read the "Are you living in a Computer Simulation" by Nick Bostrom, and today I got this fresh new video from you. Thank you Lex!
Lex is one of my biggest inspirations for making my brain get off its ass when I feel like I'm being mentally lazy and when I'm depressed his podcast always helps me some way or another but I gotta be honest. He seemed like he wasn't feeling this one and in my opinion he doesn't need to do the show when he is in one of these moods. He was a bit of a smartass from the very beginning if you pay attention and it kind of killed the whole thing for me. I somehow missed this one so I know this comment is late and pretty much irrelevant but just damn he wasn't feeling this one and it shows in a huge way. Lex if you read this I love you man but please don't do this in the future. I know this is old but I feel like this could have been my favorite episode if not for the bad energy and I really hope you don't ever waste another great guest again. This one is barley watchable lol but oh well love ya buddy!
My impression of Lex Fridman: "Can we linger on that for a minute?" 😂 I love Lex. I actually once ate pizza with Nick Bostrom during a religion and transhumanism preconference in Toronto (2004) but this was before I knew who he was. I got into a small argument with Bostrom -- I was 22 years old. I said that basic life forms may be common on other planets, and intelligent ones much rarer. (I was just repeating something I heard Carl Sagan say.) He counter-argued that once you get life, intelligence easily and necessarily follows with time/evolution.
Totally get your point though. Why is it presumed that beings from other planets would be more advanced than us with greater intelligence almost certainly. We could run into some cave men out there right?
@@shred337 Evolution is really fast compared to the time you need to wait until a planet forms that can harbor life. If you find a planet like Earth with good conditions it would be very unlikely that it only has bacteria.
All tosh. Talking out of your backsides. We don't know a damn thing regarding non living matter becoming alive and fish being related to men. Its all complete conjecture
True. It's one of the reasons I wanted to focus this conversation on the simulation hypothesis and simulation argument, since I feel there wasn't a definitive long-form conversation with him on this topic. Still I could've easily talked with him for 2-3 more hours on just this topic alone.
I found out about this man through Assassin's Creed: Origins! On the message board about Simulation theory on a computer that my character was going through! It's kind of neat!
I just paused at 37:15, so maybe (hopefully..?) I'm jumping the gun here, but as someone who spends waaaaay too much time thinking about simulation argument/hypothesis and related ideas ("too much" being relative to the fact that I make zero money on it, my wife and son both are at the "you've already told me this multiple times" point even though _I_ don't recall telling them even _one_ time, etc...), the idea that I tend to get stuck on is the likely possibility that, be it the Peruvian peanut farmer in the Experience Machine, a full-on ancestor simulation, or anything along similar lines, if the technological ability and societal/cultural/ethical thoughts of the sim-creating race are such as to allow for the creation of the simulation, even if one were to choose (in the Experience Machine case) to go back to the life of the Peruvian peanut farmer, once you have exited the machine, how can you be _even the least bit sure_ that you have just exited from one simulation into a "higher level" simulation? If it's possible for you to spend most of your life as Lex only to suddenly find out that you're really a farmer on a virtual reality vacation, then it means the technology is good enough to fool whatever it is that one defines as "consciousness" into fully believing in one's definition of "reality." And if that's the case, even if the "real life" as the farmer somehow "feels" _more real_ than the virtual Lex life, as far as I can tell there's literally nothing one can do at that point to be convinced that, at some point in the future, the same Mad Scientist that suddenly appeared in front of your Lex-life, telling you that it's just a simulation that you suddenly now have the option of "exiting", won't - at some point in the future - _happen again_ ...and again....and again. Not saying that I wouldn't choose to "wake up" every single time; I'm pretty confident I would. But after the first time, I don't know if I'd ever be able to focus on anything other than searching for the "more real" Mad Scientist that hooked me up to his machine in _this_ simulated world...
Brandon T and this is why it plagues you til this day in this simulation lol. What you are referring to is called a Nested Simulation and the movie The Matrix hints at it when Neo starts bending “the rules of reality” in “the real world”. Best of luck with your sanity bro, I lost mine long ago 😂
@@Wuzdarap yep, I know what it is called and have almost zero doubt that it is "more true" of an explanation of consensus reality than any others. Granted, even if one were to discover what they believed to be firm evidence that they were in a simulation, I'm not so sure there would be any way to identify if it was, in fact, evidence that we are in a simulation; it could be construed as evidence that some fundamental law of nature wasn't as fundamental as we had thought, perhaps that "magic is real", or obviously just evidence of insanity (singular or a "group hallucination")... BTW, I _thought_ I lost my sanity long ago, but over the many years since then I've decided/determined that no one - myself included - is likely what a *truly sane* person would call "sane"; and if so, in my reasoning that would indicate that the sane minority would be interpreted as insane by the not-as-sane majority, making the entire concept of sanity largely if not wholly moot, anyway... :D
Brandon T man, I’ve had the exact same thoughts. Sanity is so relative. Breakdancing in medieval times may be deemed witchcraft but in the 80s it’s perfectly normal to do. So I kinda stopped giving a crap about my sanity lol. And I agree, if we found evidence of simulation, the science community would do a great job of positioning it as a re-understanding of science rather than admitting that it is something outside of that umbrella. 🤦♂️
My take on it: If the glitches are bearable, what's the difference? I call it the Cypher-argument. Basically everyentity will choose the tastier steak ;-)
The pathology of that thought process is what the movie inception is about. And the natural result of this pathology is to kill yourself to wake up. Which might seem logical in all of its pathological logic. Except. Since you already accepted the fact you don't know if you are in the "last reality". If you kill yourself you will never know when you reach the last reality and hence will never do. So the rational thing is to NOT kill yourself. Which I think the movie ignored and was for me a dissapoitnment. Still a A grade movie about this topic.
I had a dream I was within the facility where this simulation is being run. Everyone had a very nice, rather opulent cubicle. I got in trouble for not staying in my cubicle and going into other rooms I wasn't assigned to. So they kicked me out of the facility and asked me not to return. As a parting gift they gave me a software box, and it had the source code for the simulation in it. I was disappointed that it was so minimal, so simple, so I threw the box out instead of keeping it. Then I went outside and enjoyed reality. If you've experienced and understand the concept of "Procedural Universe" as represented in the game "No Man's Sky" you can understand how simple the coding, how little processing power and storage would be required to generate a convincing simulation of a complex seeming reality. So the question then is "why make a simulation of this nature?" The answer becomes evident when you consider how artificial intelligence is nurtured. Neural nets become more connected, more "able" as they're exposed to phenomenon. Perhaps our true nature is something separate from this reality, yet requiring exposure to this kind of phenomenon to "grow" and become more able, more powerful, more able to do "work"?
An under-appreciated comment! By the sounds of things, just as with New Age ideas that we are here to learn in a cosmic school, so could the beings we actually are be experiencing this simulation, to achieve understandings they couldn’t get from merely studying or theorising about embodied ‘life’.
After Vitalik and Simon, you drop this bomb on us! Lex, god bless you and your podcast. This guy is an inspiration, both of his books, Anthropic Bias: Observation Selection Effects in Science and Philosophy (2002) and Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies (2014) are truly amazing reads. I hope to see you @ MIT if I get a chance to do a talk there.
47:58 Les "gets it". This conversation, by the way in which it goes 'round about' stemming from (I'm presuming) merely the difference "in how" each of these gentlemen minds' "works" is providing quite clear insights into a most fantastic journey of mental exercise.
In several podcasts with Nick Bostrom he has touched on the possibility of us learning a new and major idea that changes our entire outlook or way we choose to live...changes what we view as most important. I would love to hear his thoughts on what might happen, how it might change us, if we could prove reincarnation. How would this change the way we live and the choices we make as well as the possible implications on a larger, cosmic scale. Have him back and ask him Lex!
I’d rather he didn’t. His podcast is mostly a place to interview serious people. Yudkowsky is not a serious thinker. His greatest achievement is scamming Peter Thiel into funding his ‘research’.
sumitsijher some very intelligent people spend much time asking if the universe could be a simulation. And actually this question was already answered. The answer is that it doesn't really matter if it is fundamentally a simulation, because for our kind of experience, our brain as a bio computing system, already access the "world" as info, and generating a inner representation that we can access... so we are already constrained to our own simulation, even if the info from which the universe is made is somewhat fundamental and display some teleological physics property. For the human experience it still need to be completely artificial. the world as will and representation from schopenhauer kind of proposes this.
@@johnniefujita Well said! I agree with this. The point is not so much about wether we are living in a simulation or not. The important essence of the matter, is that nature and our experience has the interesting property that it **seems as if** the universe was a simulation.
A podcast with David Deutsch would be great and a second with Joscha Bach would be wonderful. I've been looking so long for a channel like this. And now i already found it. Also loved Nick Bostroms and Max Tegmarks work. I‘m thrilled. Thank you Lex for this!
Loved this interview. Great job Lex. I’m trying to get Nick on my Architects Guide podcast - no luck as yet. Dystopia and Utopia are interwoven permanently. Architects know this. So by extension the two binaries interweave in the simulation. In addition Kastrup’s hypothesis of irreducible consciousness usurps simulation theory beautifully but doesn’t negate it….
I think there is a usefulness to knowing we're in a simulation. If we can learn to control it or learn to communicate with the creators, the implications would be pretty crazy.
@@taon2004 If you replace the word "people" with "19 year old lesbians", and "drink coffee" with "digitally masturbate", then the answer is a resounding YES!
Excellent interview! Very objective and thoroughly explorative. Intelligence, the ability to solve complex problems, the use of interconnections and dynamism of Systems A and Blue.
34:30 'I don''t know how you can definitively say that something is real': eXistenZ (1999) is a great movie illustrating this. great watch during lock-down!
I exist in base reality, and I just want to say you are all doing a really great job. Keep going! This is why your simulation was built so please enjoy the experience! :)
I can't believe how much better this interview was than the one Nick did with Rogan. I mean this was MANY orders of magnitude more interesting and thought provoking.
Nick tactically avoided answering the question "what is real". Indeed, if you once couldn't tell the difference between simulation and reality, how can you be sure of any reality at all?
Thoroughly thought challenging and informative. Sir Rodger Penrose has a humility and joy of his craft that inspires the curiosity that’s necessary for learning. Years from now good chance the term “classic” will describe this video.
Awesome conversation! I'm new to this podcast but I'm beginning to love it. I had a thought In regards to Bostrom's Simulation Argument that I would love to hear other opinions on: If humanity does reach a point of technological maturity in which we do build an ancestor simulation, does that not prove that we are living in an ancestor simulation by disproving the other two alternatives?
And by extension, wouldn't that make producing an ancestor simulation the logical goal of anyone who's curious about the legitimacy of the Simulation Hypothesis?
For those swayed by Bostrom's simulation argument and other Bayesian arguments which rely on the anthropic principle, I would recommended checking out David Deutsch's arguments against Bayesianism. His conversation on it on the Jolly Swagman podcast is great and in-depth. He argues the simulation hypothesis is no different than a religious argument, it explains nothing observable about reality. Also, Bayes theorem is true when it relates to situations for which it was designed, namely: games of chance. Here, the prior probabilities for an event to occur are known, and thus feasibly updated. However, outside of this, Bayesianism amounts to inductive reasoning, and just plain logic at its best. Without explanatory knowledge we cannot know prior probabilities for most events in the world, especially in a quantum universe.
Thanks Lex and Nick for such a fascinating discussion. Its so refreshing to have real scientists opening up without the tinfoil hats or religions but jobs having a go or interrupting when discussing this topic. Looking forward to hearing more. Everything I have studied, investigated and applied all points in this direction.
I really enjoyed this conversation with Nick. Here's the outline:
0:00 - Introduction
2:48 - Simulation hypothesis and simulation argument
12:17 - Technologically mature civilizations
15:30 - Case 1: if something kills all possible civilizations
19:08 - Case 2: if we lose interest in creating simulations
22:03 - Consciousness
26:27 - Immersive worlds
28:50 - Experience machine
41:10 - Intelligence and consciousness
48:58 - Weighing probabilities of the simulation argument
1:01:43 - Elaborating on Joe Rogan conversation
1:05:53 - Doomsday argument and anthropic reasoning
1:23:02 - Elon Musk
1:25:26 - What's outside the simulation?
1:29:52 - Superintelligence
1:47:27 - AGI utopia
1:52:41 - Meaning of life
Really enjoyed this episode and came to the conclusion that an AGI utopia would consist of a perfect balance of all outcomes reguardless of the metric.What good are the highs without the lows?
I like how Nick will answer a simple question with an answer that's 10x deeper than anything. Not poking fun, enjoyed his insight.
Please do the talk with the David Deutsch :)
Alessandro Filippi Yes but the question is what happens when masturbation is indistinguishable or even preferrable to real sex? And not even just in the sense that it is more enjoyable, but possibly even in being more meaningful and fulfilling. Or what if the use of simulated experience in and of itself create a better model of reality in any number of ways?
They skipped one very convincing illustration of the simulation argument.
In the event there is one single simulation running anywhere in the universe at any point in time what do we conclude?
Given there exists two realities in this scenario there is a 50% chance we are the simulation. The probability rises from there.
Another notable point seldom discussed it number of simulations is the stronger argument relative to number of humans.
As a near cost abstraction total population can be infinite where population that has experiences and memories ranges from one to N plus the low resolution model of the universe.
There is more.
There's too much going on in AI right now, bring this man back on the podcast!
Totally agree!
💯
Oath
NOW
NO
This guy is my new favorite interviewer. He is great to listen to if you want to really follow every word or just some bits and pieces while you fall asleep. His pace and tone are absolutely wonderful to hear. He allows the guest talk and then asks pertinent questions. Most excellent job. Thank you!
totally agree 🖖
I take a nap to Lex everyday. The interviews are very interesting, but somehow also very easy to nap to.
Nick Bostrom has pioneered so many concepts that we now realize are crucial (existential risks, superintelligence, instrumental convergence...). I would love to see him distill his deep insights on AI in a second round!
This is the conversation we're all subbed for.
You said it.
Exactly. I get Lex want to talk with a lot of people in different areas, but what he can do better than most, is having hopefully high and even higher level conversations about computational topics.
This and Jim Keller. I loved the dynamic of a brilliant engineer and a brilliant research scientist with overlapping fields of focus riffing witty banter off each other. I had a raging brainer watching that one.
No, this is the guest we subbed for, since he's the one with the Sim hypothesis Lex questions a lot of his guests around. But to him, Lex was just setting firm ground and enumerating definitions, the conversation didn't really take off far from there at all. I was really disappointed with the shallowness to which this podcast persisted. Lex could've also discussed a lot of his thoughts to him for an interdisciplinary discourse.
I am just hoping for a follow up with Bostrom , which delves much deeper than his books and papers most of which I've already read and opens up avenues for new grand questions and perspectives
@@PoeRacing Jim Keller is probably my favorite interview.
This is the sole interview that has me listening to lex fridman as much as I can to this day. It’s the first time I ever discovered who he was and it doesn’t matter who he interviews, he’s always as genuine as one could be. Watching his podcasts are always a breath of fresh air.
I've heard all these arguments many times before, but Nick is still one of my favorite people to listen to .............
Nick is awesome
Lex, I wanted to take a moment to thank you for posting your interview with Bostrom. I would have never had access to that information or dialogue on my own, so I wanted very much to complement the work your are doing and the effort you put forth.
You could measure the speed of light from how fast I clicked on this. Lex you are the premier intellectual interviewer of this generation. Phenomenal individual & good hearted human
In the land of the blind the one-eyed is king.
@Nino Brown And you have the arrogance to believe you are not an NPC?
Not possible for you to move at the speed of light. Downvote
Lex your channel is truly amazing, thank you so much for your work man! In 4 days I'm going to graduate with a thesis about AI and I'm learning so so much thanks to your work, every video you post is a masterpiece, beautiful and easy to follow. In time, I hope to become a professor myself and teach philosophy of technology at University. Thank you again, you are an exemple and people like you make RUclips the wonderful thing it is
How's it going 2 years later?
Philosophy of technology sounds like a very interesting field.
Just make sure to understand well and teach and incorporate the fact of Energy, Minerals, and Resource Blinders that have been worn by most humans for the last few or more generations, i.e., that Biophysical Realities are ignored by virtually ALL economists, financiers, engineers, builders, manufacturers, distributors, and EVEN consumers. Re: The Great Simplification by Dr. Nate Hagens et al. CUZ, we're continuing to ignore THIS very much to our own peril namely collectively as a kind of Super-Organism -- which is the entirety of Humanity, not unlike a speeding train without a conductor AND it's literally running out of track on a finite planet that's ALREADY hit or crossed over 30 planetary boundaries, LIMITS, as well as being past PEAK on MANY things, WHILE still others have been so depleted to dangerously low levels as to make it feasible for most people on Earth to be facing a very MUCH lessier LESS future in the next few decades since materials and energies inputs and THROUGHPUTS will have been completely exhausted. If we don't ACTUALLY get that sh-tuff down AND fully understood NOW, then we truly are on not ONLY a self limiting trajectory BUT rather we are on a self terminating course: think Easter Island and countless other civilizations societies and cultures that have gone extinct or into collapse over the last severa dozen eons. Without the Bio Physical Reality of resources, there's just ZERO phukken way to science or tech or Hope-ium our way outa this our current Human Predicament.
Any update after 3 years?
Thanks for the love. Seriously. Thank you for all you do here.
Thank you for this exciting conversation! Especially the quote at the very end 1:55:50 :
"Our approach to existential risks can not be one of trail and error.
There's no opportunity to learn from errors.
The reactive approach […] is unworkable.
Rather, we must take a proactive approach.
This requires foresight to anticipate new types of threats
and a willingness to take decisive preventative action
and to bear the costs, moral and economic, of such actions."
Nick Bostrom
Being able to adapt into a society of that sort may very well be the decider whether we hit an early filter or not.
Get your ass to Mars!
Today, I was jogging at 6.2 speed with no incline on a treadmill. The treadmill suddenly, and unexpectedly, COMPLETELY STOPPED. I was shocked when I looked down and saw the motionless belt. Incredibly, both my feet had stopped also. I felt frozen in place. I had zero loss of balance, or any forward momentum. That exact moment didn't feel real. It was a moment of extreme fear, relief, and amazement. How could I react so quickly without notice?
I'm 66 years old, and spend a lot of hours on the treadmill. I primarily speed walk at 4.5 speed, and occasionally jog at 6.2, and sprint at 8.2. I average 45 minutes of duration. Today I had been on the treadmill for just over an hour.
I constantly vary my speed, cadence and stride and believe I'm always in total control. I've treadmilled 60+ miles in a day and have published a few posts explaining how I feel a connection between my brain, body, and the treadmill. My focus is locked into a spot on the treadmill headboard throughout my sessions. I'm constantly focused on stride symmetry. This extreme level of focus was perpetuated by my skeletal imbalance. I'm missing a significant part of my shoulder blade due to a jaw transplant.
I wouldn't dare consider reinacting what happened today. It doesn't seem physically possible for me to stop simultaneously with the treadmill,and have no loss of balance or feel any forward momentum. Can someone explain how this would support the simulation argument?
That moment was the most unreal moment of my life. The next closest were two near death experiences.
I love the precise and logical way Nick Bostrom answers questions. Philosophers are the computer scientists of the humanities.
Lex, bring back Nick! He has had the best prediction of what is happening right now.
Honestly, your podcast line up is essentially my ideal dinner party. So many among guests
Nick's cranium has optimised itself for computation over the years with some pretty neat cooling solutions.
Great podcast.
Brilliant!!! :D
BALDY!
"I recently got my hands on a bunch of Roombas. Don't ask me how or why."
Daniel Luna Lolol 😂
41:12 for anyone who wants a quick link back to it
They fell off a truck.
Soooo... How and Why!!!????
@@ianyboo Thank you
5 am, birds chirping, racing mind, and the inability to sleep. Ahh, what a perfectly timed video to stumble upon.
Hope you feel better today.racing mind is very troubling.i get that alot
This.
Yikes, reminds me of my party days. No thx
Was anticipating Bostrom's presence on this podcast since an eon. I appreciate the amount of time spent setting clear definitions and enumerating hypotheses but I honestly hoped that this conversation would've delved much deeper and would've generated many more grand open questions for everyone, including both of them.
Since Lex has always been asking the question of simulations to interested guests, I am just assuming that there will be a further follow-up podcast with Nick which will commence from where you don't have to establish firm ground. And also that Lex will impart some accessible insights from his research to the guests so that their thinking can be more inter-disciplinary leading to generation of even greater holistic ideas.
gee I hope Lex don't invite or talk to this sad goof ever again!
his imagination is so child like and under developed it made me question my subscription to this podcast! hopefully Lex's other guests are quite scientific and intelligent but this overwhelmed glass goof with his imaginary civilizations and dreams of disconnecting from reality just makes me cringe so hard to the point I just can't finish watching this...
@@arasharshadi5009 "gee I hope" you're kidding or maybe have really a lot of guts to judge the intelligence of a celebrated Oxford professor. He's also the author of the bestselling book "Superintelligence", which sparked an era of AGI Safety that Lex Fridman himself followed, and it will continue to be the most important discussion and research area in this century. He also formulated the Simulation hypothesis which Lex seems to be questioning about to almost every other guest, so in most ways, Nick Bostrom is an inspiration to Lex and a million others.
And please develop some abstract and philosophical thinking capabilities, Science has always been closely intertwined with these fundamentals. AI Safety, ethics, morality will indeed require ideas from all fields.
@@akarshrastogi3682 Well said.
Arash Arshadi this is so fucking funny and ironic coming from someone with a Matrix profile picture.
@@arasharshadi5009 I agree...who IS this silly man? Most comments make me wonder who people are trying to impress. Hopefully Lex will forget another interview with this chaotic mind.
You have the nicest and most honest introduction you always use - I never skip around in your talks bc you never randomly break the flow to plug something. You're appreciated! Thanks for that and the content. Be it Chomsky, Vitalik, Tegmark... so on and so forth.
Both these SOB's having this conversation in their second language 🙌💪
What's their first language, binary?
The host is doing a decent job of trying to keep the discussion grownded in reality, without being condacending. The guest undermined in argument by saying one has to make the large assumption that thus is a simulation, that's an appeal to ignorance.
The thing is, wither or not our reality is a simulation, that is a different topic from the developing if super intellegence. So, the guest has tossed in a red harring or straw man, as he switches from discussing things being a simulation to talking about A.I. and artificial super intellegence. Two different topics.
@@ernestmac13 Did you watch a different video?
I have never heard anybody explaining clearly the argument (''at least one of these three propositions is true...). It never goes beyond: '' there is a logical possibility that...''; which amount to '' We could be in a dream...''. And obviously there is no need of a computer scientist to conceive such a thing...
Wow! Nick Bostrom is remarkably intelligent and articulate while also being fairly humble and self-aware of the grandiosity of his theory. Loved the conversation! Thank you, @Lex Fridman for making this happen. Your channel is fantastic.
The perfect guest for this podcast!
I really enjoyed this conversation with Nick. Here's the outline:
0:00 - Introduction
2:48 - Simulation hypothesis and simulation argument
12:17 - Technologically mature civilizations
15:30 - Case 1: if something kills all possible civilizations
19:08 - Case 2: if we lose interest in creating simulations
22:03 - Consciousness
26:27 - Immersive worlds
28:50 - Experience machine
41:10 - Intelligence and consciousness
48:58 - Weighing probabilities of the simulation argument
1:01:43 - Elaborating on Joe Rogan conversation
1:05:53 - Doomsday argument and anthropic reasoning
1:23:02 - Elon Musk
1:25:26 - What's outside the simulation?
1:29:52 - Superintelligence
1:47:27 - AGI utopia
1:52:41 - Meaning of life
Don’t sell out Lex, you are very much needed to bridge the Laymen with the academics.
You will have one of the biggest channels in the near future, you are a teacher of teachers🇬🇧👊🏼
Never clicked quicker in my life. Thanks for this awesome conversation!
I can honestly say this was one of the most awesome discussions i have ever listened to in my life. Lex has this incredible ability to ask the perfect questions to allow us to get a glimpse into the minds of these geniuses.
"Superintelligence" great book , highly recommend !
Most difficult book I've ever read, and yet the most rewarding at the same time. I'm not a programmer, or educated in the sciences, or in philosophy for that matter, yet I enjoyed it enormously. I highly recommend it.
Is the book readable? The interview took me three days to complete. I am certain I barely understood Nick.
o g It’s a tough read. Very technical. Bostrom has said himself that even though it turned out to be a best seller he didn’t write it with a mainstream audience in mind.
@@fissionmail3d Thank you. I will read the tome when I have the patience to undertake a TECH read. Take Care.
@@ashaki4795 I have the book and I feel like it's a type of book that you don't have to read from beginning to end. You can just pick out parts that you like/can understand can skip the parts you don't. I wonder if you read it btw, since you posted these comments 4 and 5 months ago.
I love the final question; the meaning of life. This got me thinking that perhaps “life” is the game or space we find ourselves in and hence the best answer I can come up with would be, and not glibly, “to get through it as best we can”, with ‘best’ being a more universal connotation. We find ourselves here, there is no choice... so “keep walking” and make it meaningful...
Just finished reading "Superintelligence" by Nick Bostrom and a day later this video pops up! Never clicked a noti faster in my entire life! Also how would we ever know when we've finally hit "bedrock" reality? like you said in an earlier video, it's always possible that the creators hard coded some proofs so that no conscious agent could escape the simulation..
Without being rude, I hope you realise that that's AGI in effect.
@@MalcolmsShow It's not AGI in effect. We haven't reached AGI yet and at this very moment, it is impossible to achieve. What Fortnite King isn't understanding is that when you buy the book, the data from the bookstore and/or your credit card company (depending on how you paid for the book) is sold to Google whose software will then start to add related videos to your suggested videos list. It's not coincidental nor is it AGI.
@@GeeTBase Sentient AI has existed for over a decade, & sentient AGI has existed for years, just because you aren't aware of it doesn't mean it doesn't exist...
@@MalcolmsShow No Malcom, that is actually incorrect. Neither sentient AI or AGI exists. It's not a matter of me being aware of it or not, it's simply a current limitation of mankind and our technology. That's not to say it will never exist, it may, one day, just not right now.
You might be defining sentience or the actual terms of "Sentient AI" and "AGI" as something different than what they are, but feel free to do any amount of research that you want. These are things that people are trying to work toward achieving, but we can't even come close since we don't actually know how the human brain works.
@@GeeTBase AGI low level is here already you just do not know it.
Finally, the podcast and the interviewer Nick Bostrom deserved 👍🏻
Yes! Rogan didn`t grasp the subject at all and got all weird.
This is the guest I was waiting for.
Thanks for your Coronapocalypse playlist
This is the conversation we're all subbed for.
I like Nick bostrom, he’s such a clear thinker
I'm going to watch this with my coffee, first thing in the morning.
The Matrix is in sync with me. Literally yesterday I read the "Are you living in a Computer Simulation" by Nick Bostrom, and today I got this fresh new video from you. Thank you Lex!
Hopefully the simulation still has coffee in it.
"At the risk of asking the Beatles to play Yesterday, or the Rolling Stones to play Satisfaction .." -- brilliant introduction!!
Lex is one of my biggest inspirations for making my brain get off its ass when I feel like I'm being mentally lazy and when I'm depressed his podcast always helps me some way or another but I gotta be honest. He seemed like he wasn't feeling this one and in my opinion he doesn't need to do the show when he is in one of these moods. He was a bit of a smartass from the very beginning if you pay attention and it kind of killed the whole thing for me. I somehow missed this one so I know this comment is late and pretty much irrelevant but just damn he wasn't feeling this one and it shows in a huge way. Lex if you read this I love you man but please don't do this in the future. I know this is old but I feel like this could have been my favorite episode if not for the bad energy and I really hope you don't ever waste another great guest again. This one is barley watchable lol but oh well love ya buddy!
Well this is the best ASMR I ever have and make learn something
Thanks for the love Lex
A wonderful interview. Lex, you are the Nick Bostrom of interviewers.
I have been waiting for Nick Bostrom to appear for months. Thank you again Lex! :D
Love right back at you Lex. You are a wonderful young man. Thank you for your podcasts.
The perfect guest for this podcast!
My impression of Lex Fridman: "Can we linger on that for a minute?" 😂 I love Lex. I actually once ate pizza with Nick Bostrom during a religion and transhumanism preconference in Toronto (2004) but this was before I knew who he was. I got into a small argument with Bostrom -- I was 22 years old. I said that basic life forms may be common on other planets, and intelligent ones much rarer. (I was just repeating something I heard Carl Sagan say.) He counter-argued that once you get life, intelligence easily and necessarily follows with time/evolution.
Totally get your point though. Why is it presumed that beings from other planets would be more advanced than us with greater intelligence almost certainly. We could run into some cave men out there right?
@@shred337 Evolution is really fast compared to the time you need to wait until a planet forms that can harbor life. If you find a planet like Earth with good conditions it would be very unlikely that it only has bacteria.
All tosh. Talking out of your backsides. We don't know a damn thing regarding non living matter becoming alive and fish being related to men. Its all complete conjecture
I'm with you and Carl Sagan.
@@georgetubb9124 We know a thing or two about those things, but we don't know a very much about them on other planets, for sure.
Finally a great place I can point to and say _"This is the guy, and that's his take on the Simulation Hypothesis"_
True. It's one of the reasons I wanted to focus this conversation on the simulation hypothesis and simulation argument, since I feel there wasn't a definitive long-form conversation with him on this topic. Still I could've easily talked with him for 2-3 more hours on just this topic alone.
Lex is so well mannered, you can't help but like him.
17:05 Lex got a badge of "Interesting person" from Nick, an honor :)
Oh my god that was hilarious 😂😂😂
I found out about this man through Assassin's Creed: Origins! On the message board about Simulation theory on a computer that my character was going through! It's kind of neat!
I just paused at 37:15, so maybe (hopefully..?) I'm jumping the gun here, but as someone who spends waaaaay too much time thinking about simulation argument/hypothesis and related ideas ("too much" being relative to the fact that I make zero money on it, my wife and son both are at the "you've already told me this multiple times" point even though _I_ don't recall telling them even _one_ time, etc...), the idea that I tend to get stuck on is the likely possibility that, be it the Peruvian peanut farmer in the Experience Machine, a full-on ancestor simulation, or anything along similar lines, if the technological ability and societal/cultural/ethical thoughts of the sim-creating race are such as to allow for the creation of the simulation, even if one were to choose (in the Experience Machine case) to go back to the life of the Peruvian peanut farmer, once you have exited the machine, how can you be _even the least bit sure_ that you have just exited from one simulation into a "higher level" simulation? If it's possible for you to spend most of your life as Lex only to suddenly find out that you're really a farmer on a virtual reality vacation, then it means the technology is good enough to fool whatever it is that one defines as "consciousness" into fully believing in one's definition of "reality." And if that's the case, even if the "real life" as the farmer somehow "feels" _more real_ than the virtual Lex life, as far as I can tell there's literally nothing one can do at that point to be convinced that, at some point in the future, the same Mad Scientist that suddenly appeared in front of your Lex-life, telling you that it's just a simulation that you suddenly now have the option of "exiting", won't - at some point in the future - _happen again_ ...and again....and again.
Not saying that I wouldn't choose to "wake up" every single time; I'm pretty confident I would. But after the first time, I don't know if I'd ever be able to focus on anything other than searching for the "more real" Mad Scientist that hooked me up to his machine in _this_ simulated world...
Brandon T and this is why it plagues you til this day in this simulation lol. What you are referring to is called a Nested Simulation and the movie The Matrix hints at it when Neo starts bending “the rules of reality” in “the real world”. Best of luck with your sanity bro, I lost mine long ago 😂
@@Wuzdarap yep, I know what it is called and have almost zero doubt that it is "more true" of an explanation of consensus reality than any others. Granted, even if one were to discover what they believed to be firm evidence that they were in a simulation, I'm not so sure there would be any way to identify if it was, in fact, evidence that we are in a simulation; it could be construed as evidence that some fundamental law of nature wasn't as fundamental as we had thought, perhaps that "magic is real", or obviously just evidence of insanity (singular or a "group hallucination")...
BTW, I _thought_ I lost my sanity long ago, but over the many years since then I've decided/determined that no one - myself included - is likely what a *truly sane* person would call "sane"; and if so, in my reasoning that would indicate that the sane minority would be interpreted as insane by the not-as-sane majority, making the entire concept of sanity largely if not wholly moot, anyway... :D
Brandon T man, I’ve had the exact same thoughts. Sanity is so relative. Breakdancing in medieval times may be deemed witchcraft but in the 80s it’s perfectly normal to do. So I kinda stopped giving a crap about my sanity lol.
And I agree, if we found evidence of simulation, the science community would do a great job of positioning it as a re-understanding of science rather than admitting that it is something outside of that umbrella. 🤦♂️
My take on it: If the glitches are bearable, what's the difference?
I call it the Cypher-argument. Basically everyentity will choose the tastier steak ;-)
The pathology of that thought process is what the movie inception is about. And the natural result of this pathology is to kill yourself to wake up.
Which might seem logical in all of its pathological logic. Except. Since you already accepted the fact you don't know if you are in the "last reality". If you kill yourself you will never know when you reach the last reality and hence will never do. So the rational thing is to NOT kill yourself. Which I think the movie ignored and was for me a dissapoitnment. Still a A grade movie about this topic.
he nails the whole possibility simply enough at 44:31
So many great questions! I’m glad you didn’t go down the same typical roads people take when interviewing him.
@Lex fridman sweet! i'll also give him my SSN and all of my bank info, thanks
Thank you so much for the conversation.
I had a dream I was within the facility where this simulation is being run. Everyone had a very nice, rather opulent cubicle. I got in trouble for not staying in my cubicle and going into other rooms I wasn't assigned to. So they kicked me out of the facility and asked me not to return. As a parting gift they gave me a software box, and it had the source code for the simulation in it. I was disappointed that it was so minimal, so simple, so I threw the box out instead of keeping it. Then I went outside and enjoyed reality.
If you've experienced and understand the concept of "Procedural Universe" as represented in the game "No Man's Sky" you can understand how simple the coding, how little processing power and storage would be required to generate a convincing simulation of a complex seeming reality.
So the question then is "why make a simulation of this nature?"
The answer becomes evident when you consider how artificial intelligence is nurtured. Neural nets become more connected, more "able" as they're exposed to phenomenon. Perhaps our true nature is something separate from this reality, yet requiring exposure to this kind of phenomenon to "grow" and become more able, more powerful, more able to do "work"?
very interesting
An under-appreciated comment! By the sounds of things, just as with New Age ideas that we are here to learn in a cosmic school, so could the beings we actually are be experiencing this simulation, to achieve understandings they couldn’t get from merely studying or theorising about embodied ‘life’.
Lex, the interviews you do are the best I found so far. Greetings from a middle aged woman in Sweden.
This is amazing! Please get Terence Tao, Ray Kurzweil and Ed Witten as well!
Fantastic. Well done Lex. There are many more that are seeing the light. Let's keep bringing these humans together to make this a better place.
After Vitalik and Simon, you drop this bomb on us! Lex, god bless you and your podcast. This guy is an inspiration, both of his books, Anthropic Bias: Observation Selection Effects in Science and Philosophy (2002) and Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies (2014) are truly amazing reads.
I hope to see you @ MIT if I get a chance to do a talk there.
God ?….
@@frieda3569 what about you
47:58 Les "gets it". This conversation, by the way in which it goes 'round about' stemming from (I'm presuming) merely the difference "in how" each of these gentlemen minds' "works" is providing quite clear insights into a most fantastic journey of mental exercise.
Awwwwwwee yahhh! This will be great excited as usual and watching straight away! Thank you for all you do, Lex!😁
Just getting into your podcasts. The thing that strikes me is the pacing of your interviews. It's really very pleasant.
In several podcasts with Nick Bostrom he has touched on the possibility of us learning a new and major idea that changes our entire outlook or way we choose to live...changes what we view as most important. I would love to hear his thoughts on what might happen, how it might change us, if we could prove reincarnation. How would this change the way we live and the choices we make as well as the possible implications on a larger, cosmic scale. Have him back and ask him Lex!
You are a fantastic interviewer. I think you’ve reached the limit on the amount of times you can say “can’t you linger on that” without it detracting.
would love for you to interview eliezer yudowsky
or robin hanson
Ive asked him when hes interviewing Eliezer a few times on twitter and he's never responded. I really hope it happens
@@lambertronix Haha...it would take the anti-Lex to interview Brittany Spears.
I’d rather he didn’t. His podcast is mostly a place to interview serious people. Yudkowsky is not a serious thinker. His greatest achievement is scamming Peter Thiel into funding his ‘research’.
@@randommcranderson5155 hit me baby one more time
Lex Fridman -- many Kudos for Understanding LOVE !
This, and Demis', are the ones to go for. Thank you Lex.
Your podcast is incredible ✨🤍🔥💫
Thanks
Brilliant people, thanks Lex for your great work! Much respect!!!
Best podcast ever
Congratulations, Lex! You finally found the guy who will answer your "Are we living in a simulation?" question! : )
sumitsijher some very intelligent people spend much time asking if the universe could be a simulation. And actually this question was already answered. The answer is that it doesn't really matter if it is fundamentally a simulation, because for our kind of experience, our brain as a bio computing system, already access the "world" as info, and generating a inner representation that we can access... so we are already constrained to our own simulation, even if the info from which the universe is made is somewhat fundamental and display some teleological physics property. For the human experience it still need to be completely artificial. the world as will and representation from schopenhauer kind of proposes this.
the answer is; even if the universe is not a simulation. We still would experience it as if it was one.
@@johnniefujita Well said! I agree with this. The point is not so much about wether we are living in a simulation or not. The important essence of the matter, is that nature and our experience has the interesting property that it **seems as if** the universe was a simulation.
Johnnie Fujita that’s not the point of the question.
@@johnniefujita because it is one lol...
A podcast with David Deutsch would be great and a second with Joscha Bach would be wonderful. I've been looking so long for a channel like this. And now i already found it. Also loved Nick Bostroms and Max Tegmarks work. I‘m thrilled. Thank you Lex for this!
Holy! This was so insightful. Lots to think about for the weekend
Loved this interview. Great job Lex. I’m trying to get Nick on my Architects Guide podcast - no luck as yet. Dystopia and Utopia are interwoven permanently. Architects know this. So by extension the two binaries interweave in the simulation.
In addition Kastrup’s hypothesis of irreducible consciousness usurps simulation theory beautifully but doesn’t negate it….
LEX thanks for these most amazing interviews. every darn one of them.
Lex be droppin gems man!
I was hoping for some more philosophical conversations. Thanks, Lex.
I have a feeling you helped change my life. thank you.
I think there is a usefulness to knowing we're in a simulation. If we can learn to control it or learn to communicate with the creators, the implications would be pretty crazy.
The Creator response: screw you!! It is time to reboot this computer and start this game all over again! ;-)
Never heard from Nick before… but wow. What a high level conversation. Guy seems to be putting so many variables about each topic into consideration.
39:00 watch Star Trek The Next Generation: "The Inner Light" Episode.
Potentially consciousness changing episode. A work of art.
Whenever I can't sleep this is my go-to. Thank you lex
Nice how the camera cuts to Lex every time he takes a sip from his coffee
It's all post-production trickery - he uses the same clip every time.
@@user-lo3vc4ot5g haha you made me double-check, could be true. Equally probably he's an AI who always picks up the cup the exact same way.
@@appletree6741 haha yeah, i made it all up. But I would believe he's an AI
Why? Do you like watching people drink coffee?
@@taon2004 If you replace the word "people" with "19 year old lesbians", and "drink coffee" with "digitally masturbate", then the answer is a resounding YES!
Lex is such a beautiful soul. Love these guys!:) much love from lower bama
This is exactly what I needed! Love nick
Excellent interview! Very objective and thoroughly explorative. Intelligence, the ability to solve complex problems, the use of interconnections and dynamism of Systems A and Blue.
1:54:40
Thinking about philosophical value systems as shapes in high dimensional space... kind of cool :)
Nick you're brilliant, we've got you protected given the impacts of your work to humanity and relationships. I am certainly an admirer of yours.
34:30 'I don''t know how you can definitively say that something is real': eXistenZ (1999) is a great movie illustrating this. great watch during lock-down!
I enjoyed eXistenZ back then. Though provoking movie. Thanks for reminding me to watch again.
I'd love to see a conversation between Nick Bostrom and Sabine Hossenfelder.
Meh. Sabine doesn't really appreciate philosophy it seems like. I don't think she would enjoy talking to Nick.
@@janhradecky3141 That's the whole point lol. She seems to hold the opposing view to everything that Nick believes. I think it'd be interesting.
I exist in base reality, and I just want to say you are all doing a really great job. Keep going! This is why your simulation was built so please enjoy the experience! :)
Yes, yes, but could I make some requests for one or two tweaks?
Kill me
I can't believe how much better this interview was than the one Nick did with Rogan. I mean this was MANY orders of magnitude more interesting and thought provoking.
Nick tactically avoided answering the question "what is real". Indeed, if you once couldn't tell the difference between simulation and reality, how can you be sure of any reality at all?
currently reading Superintelligence, and now this video appears! Nice
Love this, such a crazy/cool conversation. Thanks Lex!
Thoroughly thought challenging and informative. Sir Rodger Penrose has a humility and joy of his craft that inspires the curiosity that’s necessary for learning. Years from now good chance the term “classic” will describe this video.
So fun. Love listening to these! Keep up the great work Lex!
You are the man Lex. Congrats on the million subscribers, you are so close!
Awesome conversation! I'm new to this podcast but I'm beginning to love it. I had a thought In regards to Bostrom's Simulation Argument that I would love to hear other opinions on:
If humanity does reach a point of technological maturity in which we do build an ancestor simulation, does that not prove that we are living in an ancestor simulation by disproving the other two alternatives?
And by extension, wouldn't that make producing an ancestor simulation the logical goal of anyone who's curious about the legitimacy of the Simulation Hypothesis?
Dogs are running the Simulation! our curious, calm and loving guests 🐕🐩❤️
Is this where intelligent people on RUclips hang out?
No, this is where the people who question intelligence hang out haha
@@adolf-8834 Pass the meth my Fuhrer, Poland looking juicy rn...lets stop off in France also
😄 wel I'm hanging out so no...
no im just very board and askes questions too much
Yes, most are “trying” to be intelligent. This guy gets guests way out of his league, so exactly what you are doing.
For those swayed by Bostrom's simulation argument and other Bayesian arguments which rely on the anthropic principle, I would recommended checking out David Deutsch's arguments against Bayesianism. His conversation on it on the Jolly Swagman podcast is great and in-depth. He argues the simulation hypothesis is no different than a religious argument, it explains nothing observable about reality. Also, Bayes theorem is true when it relates to situations for which it was designed, namely: games of chance. Here, the prior probabilities for an event to occur are known, and thus feasibly updated. However, outside of this, Bayesianism amounts to inductive reasoning, and just plain logic at its best. Without explanatory knowledge we cannot know prior probabilities for most events in the world, especially in a quantum universe.
preemptive like, its bound to be a banger with the swede.
A-posteriori liking the idea of preemptive likes.
Thanks Lex and Nick for such a fascinating discussion. Its so refreshing to have real scientists opening up without the tinfoil hats or religions but jobs having a go or interrupting when discussing this topic. Looking forward to hearing more.
Everything I have studied, investigated and applied all points in this direction.