What are the odds that we’re living in a simulation versus being in “base reality”?
I have now idea how he gets to “1 in a billion” chance that we’re NOT in a simulation haha
http://www.theverge.com/2016/6/2/11837874/elon-musk-says-odds-living-in-simulation
First: “1 in a billion” isn’t odds; it’s probability.
The odds? 100:13 against.
While I respect S2000’s careful stewardship of proper semantics, I find the underlying discussion on potentially living in a simulation fascinating. The idea, first introduced to me in college philosophy courses, was made more vivid when I first saw The Matrix in theaters. It is a compelling narrative…very easy to get roped in to, especially over drinks with other philosophically-minded people.
Here’s the issue. I think to start believing that this is happening in reality is a form of anchoring bias and to some degree, self-attribution bias applied to your perception of reality. It’s what Dan Kahneman sums up as “WYSIATI” – what you see is all there is. Human beings know what they’ve experienced, and in our modern times, a computer simulation is an easy narrative to make an analog for reality.
That would be a good way out / excuse from this fucked up world
“If you assume any rate of improvement at all then games will become indistinguishable from reality,” Musk said. “Even if that rate of advancement drops by a thousand from what it is now, let’s just imagine it’s 10,000 years in the future, which is nothing on the evolutionary scale.” Given that we’re on that trajectory and that these games are increasingly playable on any device, Musk said, the odds that we are living our lives in base reality — that is, “real” reality — is one in billions.
Uhh whatever, zero logic. People in all time periods have been obsessed with the happenings of that time. Right now it’s computers, video games, AI…so he projects that pointless hobby all over the universe.
Really these guys (Hawking, Musk, etc) just want to say “smart sounding things”. Probability is less than zero, but no reason to think it a large probability. Best to focus on reality (climate change, population control), cause it’s probably real. 
Whether or not true, the assumption that our reality is a simulation specific to our own program is potentially a beneficial way to perceive ourselves vs everything else. If everyone literally inhabits their own reality it means that critical and independent thinking is the only way to form opinions, make choices, and develop a worldview. To blindly follow information based on faith in the source would be nonsense. Each individual would have to take responsibility for the basis of their choices and understanding of everything. Everyone would need to collect their own data or be alway a little skeptical of the information they did not observe or collect themselves. That would be great if everyone indeed would follow that philosophy.
Hmmm where to file the question of whether or not we’re living in a simulation? Ohh here it is: Who Gives a Fuck.
Turd and PA would get along great. Claiming they are disinterested in anything not immediately tangible and pressing. But while wasting time posting in the water cooler.
^you mad bro? Close some deals and maybe you’ll feel better.
Whether we live in a simulation is not the important question. The real question is whether our simulation is better than all the other runs. I don’t want to be living in no loser sim.
More seriously, what’s interesting is how our “maybe the universe is really X” changes with the dominant technologies and social organizations of our time. Long ago it seemed to be driven by nature spirits, then it was driven by a stricter hierarchical chain of being, then in the beginning of the Industrial Age we hypothesized it was really just a big machine like a complex clock. Today the computer is the dominant world-changing ubiquitous technology so we ask if the universe is just a big computer (though some also ask if it’s some giant organism too, maybe those are the biotech folks).
Feynmann once said that reality is not just more complex than we imagine but most likely more complex than we *can* imagine. My guess is that if we actually knew what was going on we would be astonished that the fundamental rules are so simple, yet generate such complexity in the outcome. At that point it would seem like a simulation, perhaps. But a simulation of what. Is a simulation no longer a simulation when the outcome has genuine consequences???
As always it’s opportunity cost. The species has better things to spend their time on. I, at the moment, do not! 
A common thing here on "Analyst"Forum is creating a false dichotomy. 
Simulation? Who cares - it’s still existence right
I find the discussion interesting certainly however ACE’s point is a good one. If this is a simulation what difference does it make?
But what if we develop a better simulation in the simulation, wouldn’t that be some inception shit?
Also, the correct answer is 5.
And then there is the word “simulation”.
If this is “an immitation of the operation of a real-world process or system over time”, then there is a REAL universe very similar to this one. But if there is a real one, why is Musk so certain THIS is not the real one? And if the simulation is perfect, then really they are both real.
Which is why the whole thing is really just people trying to “act deep” to impress investors/public, a bit of critical analysis and things fall apart.
And who would know better than you?
One thing I do appreciate is PA’s bold lettering in his recent posts. It helps me save time by skimming through those portions of his posts that are Darwinian rants from an angry person.
^ Yes, I do TRY to communicate clearly, help people skim , see highlights. However I DO NOT include emotion in my analyses, since that pretty much blows objectivity, which results in the wrong answer. Pro tip.
^ Absolutely, I definitely point out your posts when friends ask me, “can you show me an example of the writing style of an impartial, emotionless analyst?”
guys wasn’t this already covered in a '99 flick called the matrix
we obviously live in the matrix
i mean haven’t you seen the girl in the red dress