18
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/asklemmy@lemmy.world
top 43 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Iconoclast@feddit.uk 14 points 2 weeks ago

Intelligence isn't the important factor there - consciousness is. Does it feel like something to be those entities in the simulation? If yes, then I'd argue that ending the simulation is like killing a person painlessly in their sleep.

I personally don't think ending the simulation is even the most troubling part. We could unintentionally create a simulation that's effectively a hell and then populate it with entities that have subjective experiences we don't realize exist. The only thing worse than ending a life is creating one just for it to suffer through its entire existence.

[-] zikzak025@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

We could unintentionally create a simulation that's effectively a hell and then populate it with entities that have subjective experiences we don't realize exist. The only thing worse than ending a life is creating one just for it to suffer through its entire existence.

And this is basically the plot of the TV series Severance. Has me wondering how they intend to address it.

[-] PHLAK@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

USS Calister

Didn't scientists train brain cells to exclusively play Doom? It's like their whole conscience is stuck in a video game version of hell through a brain in a vat experience.

[-] LurkingLuddite@piefed.social 1 points 2 weeks ago

Not really. It's not nearly enough cells to have any kind of consciousness as we know it. A few neurons learning to play a game is a far cry from tying a being into a simulation of hell.

I dunno. Some life forms have only a few brain cells. It could mean their whole world for those little cells, wouldn't it?

[-] LurkingLuddite@piefed.social 3 points 1 week ago

It is definitely their entire world, but the point is it takes far more than a few cells to create actual human-relatable sentience.

That's coming from someone who fully understands and knows that many more animals than most humans care to admit also have sentience.

Those petri dishes are not sentient nor conscious.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The fun thing about ethics is that not everyone shares the same rules. Personally, I would probably say it is. (Though is more worse than what we do to cows? Or what we do to other humans in war?) However, others may say they aren't real, and only an illusion manufactured by the simulation, so it's fine. There are other arguments I'm sure someone could make too. It's up for you to decide what your ethics are, not others. There is no universal code of ethics just as there is no universal morality.

[-] Labna@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

There is a tv film, i don't know the title, related about this topic.

The plot was :

a group of scientists made a living simulation, and go in the simulation to operate fixes and prevent making simulation. On day, one the scientific was killed, and left a message in the simulation for their coworkers. The message was : "take a road and follow no direction", a guy in the simulation followed the instruction and discovered that he was in a simulation, but the message were for the scientists who are in a simulation too.

If someone can find the movie, it could be great.

[-] osanna@lemmy.vg 2 points 1 week ago
[-] topherclay@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

In 2000, The Thirteenth Floor was nominated for the Saturn Award for Best Science Fiction Film but lost to The Matrix.

Yeah that's a pretty good sell. I'll check it out.

[-] osanna@lemmy.vg 2 points 1 week ago

i liked it, but I like almost everything, so that's not much of a sell.

[-] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

and go in the simulation to operate fixes and prevent making simulation.

Pardon?

[-] Labna@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I've seen it a long time ago, and if I remember well, they have to prevent the simulation people to build a simulation, otherwise the hardware will not be able to keep up. And big part of the plot, the scientists can load in the simulation.

[-] Mrkawfee@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Yes because then your car battery won't start

[-] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 4 points 2 weeks ago

Somewhere in a box in your childhood home, a Tamagotchi is slowly dying...

[-] LurkingLuddite@piefed.social 3 points 2 weeks ago

Slowly? Those things would 'die' in under 24 hours!

[-] SelfHigh5@lemmy.world -5 points 2 weeks ago

What the fuck is a Tamagotchi

[-] DeathsEmbrace@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Only if they're conscious of the simulation.

[-] backalleycoyote@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago

Username checks out.

[-] KombatWombat@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Found God's account

[-] Tudsamfa@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

You can "simulate" life inside your brain, too.


[Alt text: this is Bob. Bob is a figment of you imagination. When you leave, Bob will leave too. "Don't leave" says Bob]

The Bob in your head is intelligent, it can communicate in English. Is it unethical to stop thinking about Bob? Was it unethical of me to show you this picture, creating a "Bob" in your head? Is any story unethical to tell?

[-] RecursiveParadox@piefed.social 2 points 2 weeks ago

One of the Minds in Ian M Banks' last novel, The Hydrogen Sonata, faces and addresses exactly this problem. Much is at stake, so it's a meaningful discussion.

I'd imagine there could be an ethical way to do so through a sunset protocol similar to the concept of rapture (the religious kind, not the Bioshock city) - freeze simulation, move all the beings' minds to "heaven", shut down physical universe simulation (lowering operation costs by at least five orders of magnitude, I'd imagine), and let them enjoy afterlife until they get tired of existing, reach nirvana, or something like that.

That reminds me, I should really get back into AI research.

[-] OwOarchist@pawb.social 2 points 2 weeks ago

Just turn down the simulation speed real low and run it at one tick per 20 years, then you can technically keep it going without such great expense. The people inside won't notice the difference.

[-] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 week ago

If you take the limit of that you'll realize that people won't raise if you turn it off either.

[-] WindyRebel@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Did you just watch “Plaything” on Black Mirror?

[-] Randelung@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Play Expedition 33 and let us know what you picked and why.

[-] manmachine@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago
[-] reksas@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 week ago

only way to know would be to enter the simulation and see for yourself.. wait a minute..

[-] you_are_dust@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

If this is a way for our simulation creator to decide to pull the plug without guilt, I guess just go ahead and do it. I was holding out hope that this was all real, but it has been getting more clear that it's not.

[-] notsure@fedia.io 1 points 2 weeks ago

...I hear Tuvix calling in the wind...

[-] dasrael@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 week ago

It would be unethical to start the simulation in the first place.....

[-] raman_klogius@ani.social 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

the simulacrants wouldn't realize the simulation is ever not running.

Kurzgesagt made a video about how in a dying universe (from heat death) civilizations that uploaded their consciousness into a simulation could live forever, by intermittently running the simulation and pausing it for greater and greater amounts of time as expendable energy in the universe diminishes. The consciousness would not perceive the time the simulation isn't running and to them things just go on and on for eternity.

[-] zbyte64@awful.systems -1 points 2 weeks ago

What I find interesting is how we abstract away the actual work needed to keep either scenario running reflects how billionaires justify their own extremes. The heat death being a most extreme example as there is no "spare" energy for other organism to be conscious. The uploaded consciousness is detached from reality, living in a dieing universe, and still insists it has a right to exist at the cost of new venues of consciousness.

[-] emotional_soup_88@programming.dev 0 points 2 weeks ago

How do you define intelligence? In any case, I think it's irrelevant. What's relevant is whether the beings are self aware or if they exist having notions and concepts of fear of death. For this reason, I deem it unethical to slaughter - for instance - animals in a setting in which their peers are aware of the moment of death of their peers. Seeing, for instance, a cow agonize about their peer in front of them being shot to death is heart-wrenching. For this reason, my answer to your question is "yes". Yes I eat meat. :3

[-] mitram@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 weeks ago

You got me curious, you seem to feel some way about slaughtering animals, but that doesn't seem to translate into your actions being aligned with your feelings.

Would you care to talk about it?

I'll be honest I have reduced my meat/dairy/egg consumption significantly, but every once in a while I'm not the one cooking at home and I don't really feel able to go on a side quest while hungry.

[-] SarahValentine@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 2 weeks ago

I'd say that whether or not it's in a simulation doesn't matter. If the beings you created were recognizable as people (human or otherwise) then they have rights and you'd be trampling those rights if you ended their existence. The creation of such life should not be done without an appropriate sense of responsibility.

[-] yesman@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

then they have rights

Why? I'm not trolling, I just really think it's interesting where people think "rights" come from. Some people think they come from God. Which is great, because in this scenario we are God. So anything we do is ethical because we did it.

I contend they come from States. Because I notice that rights are different in different States. And I don't think a god would obey jurisdiction.

Another way of saying this is that the beings themselves have to recognize and demand rights. Because a state is just people deciding things after all.

So where do the rights come from? Are they a legal/socail construct, or inherent in the universe some how? Some third thing I didn't think of?

[-] YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

People forget how scary the real world is. We are the only creatures to create this concept of rights. You think that grizzly bear cares about your rights? Got some news for you....

And shit, even we don't respect other people's right to exist.

:: gestures very very briefly to.... EVERYTHING going on right now::

You think the asteroid that ended 90+% of life on earth cared about the dinosaurs' rights?

All that being said, I wouldn't be able to pull the plug.

[-] BygoneNeutrino@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I wouldn't want to shut down the simulation, but it would depend on the energy expenditure. A hospital could theoretically save more people if they allocated fifty million dollars per patient. A person's right to life is contingent on the cost to maintain it.

[-] YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today 1 points 1 week ago

Good call, I didn't consider power consumption. I agree with you.

this post was submitted on 29 Mar 2026
18 points (100.0% liked)

Ask Lemmy

39053 readers
403 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS