No, what I’m saying is, the progress that we’ve seen may be a necessary part (a very small one) of a universe simulation if such a thing can be build.

But my claim is that we have absolutely no evidence that such a thing can be build, and even less that we’re living in one. As of today the simulation “hypothesis” is as well founded as every other metaphysical claim, creator gods included.

A sentence like “it’s very likely we live in a simulation” is about as well founded as trying to place us in any other science fiction world that has a 21st century earth at its heart.

We can model things and call them “universe”. But that’s about it.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

It’s not only about levels of detail. We have no theory about how to compute a universe.

Moores law already does not hold up any more. There’s nothing to extrapolate.

I think the analogy is perfect. Thinkers think, but they’re bound in the context of their time and place. Our time and place is full of technology, of course thinkers will spin up an origin myth that is based on technology.

But that’s really all it is.

Removed by mod

That very much reminds me about the reasoning of Descartes why a god must exist: basically because he can think about it.

But really, just because you can think of it doesn’t make anything theoretically possible. For the simulation of a universe we have no idea how to do it.

deleted by creator

I remember the general feeling you talked about, and the insanity of the idea when DRM was introduced.

It seems we vastly underestimated the ideas corporations can produce and implement.

For a short while it seemed as if with AI the field would be leveled again, but then I was astonished how quickly the EU moved with regulations first and foremost to protect copyright.

1. Grow a platform
2. AI appears on the stage
3. ???
4. Profit

Rename to “armed conflict” or “special military operations”

Did the last year in Europe fly by you unnoticed?

For me the GitHub repo is on page one.

wefwef is unique, easy to remember and easy to type. If you search for it, it’s already on page 1.

You hit all the markers for a good brand. That will be hard to recreate with an ancient god name.

Keep it.

Stackoverflow is in trouble anyway. With GPT-4 there’s hardly a reason for users to visit it. At least not for problems that existed before Sep 2021.

What do statistics say about their distribution on different sites?

I wouldn’t do it. If the user experience is bad, they’ll uninstall it “because they tried and it sucked”. Then they won’t even go back.

I like the suggestion from OP.

I was only once in an ambulance in the past 30 years or so. There, my insurance came to me afterwards and billed me a 10€ share. For some reason I found this infuriating. (Germany)

But for the last 4 days the very top of every newsanchors’ headline was something else. Probably that’s what he means.

Yeah, but as my excuse, I limit my visits to NSFW subs.