“…you should try to be as interesting as possible, on the theory that the designer is more likely to keep you around for the next simulation.”
Our Lives, Controlled From Some Guy’s Couch – New York Times
After you read the article, follow it up with this:
“Any Message for Whoever’s Simulating Our World? Leave It Here and Win a Real Prize
We interrupt this weighty discussion for an announcement. The previous post generated some excellent comments about the ethics of creating a simulated world of sentient beings, and I want to address that topic in another post. But first, let me announce a small competition based on two far-from-certain premises:
1. We’re living in a computer simulation being run by some intelligent being (ethical or otherwise) that I’ll call the Prime Designer.
2. The Prime Designer is an avid reader of this blog.
Now, is there anything you’d like to say to the Prime Designer?
Post your messages here, and the best one will receive a DVD of the “The 13th Floor” (or, if you prefer, one of the other movies or books dealing with a computer-generated world – you’ll find lots of recommendations from readers who commented after my first post on this topic.) I’ll also throw in a signed copy of my book, “The Best-Case Scenario Handbook,” which includes advice on what to say if you encounter Santa Claus or God, among other visitors.
Speaking of God, I realize some readers worry that this talk of a Prime Designer sounds like shilling for the intelligent-design side in the evolution debate. Rest assured I don’t believe this designer is a supernatural being beyond the laws of physics who created the Earth a few thousand years ago and then revealed the secret to a few clerical scribes. This simulation hypothesis isn’t an excuse to teach the Bible in addition to Darwin in science class.
But while most of the adherents of intelligent-design theory may be may be members of religions that believe in a supernatural deity, the theory of intelligent design is “not inherently theistic,” as Bradley Monton points out in this paper. Dr. Monton, a philosopher the University of Colorado, argues that the reason to teach Darwin instead of the Bible is because of empirical evidence, not because intelligent design is inherently unscientific or supernaturalistic. He writes: “The intelligent cause could be God, but it need not be. It may be that living things on Earth were created by a highly intelligent alien civilization, as Raelians believe. It may be that the whole universe we experience is really just a computer simulation being run by highly intelligent non-supernatural beings, as Nick Bostrom argues is plausible.”
If we are in that simulation, what’s your message to the simulator? You can offer constructive criticism (think of the blog as a suggestion box), meditations, strategic flattery, pleas or rationales for letting humanity (or at least you) survive and prosper in this world and beyond. Post whatever you want, and I’ll pick a winner next week.
226 comments so far…
There are at least 202 more. (Number 93 cracked me up. Now, back to work.)
1. Thank you.
— Posted by Will Perkins
2. Kudos on Jessica Biel.
— Posted by Cody
3. If we are inside a simulation, or a video game, the rules are quite unfair. In gamer geek speak, Mr. simulator you need to nerf nepotism and despotism.
While you are at it, could you kindly make me win the Mega Millions jackpot? I’m sure you are amused at that request, you seem like the type that could appreciate greed and self interest.
— Posted by Paul C
4. Stop nerfing the experience system. Thanks.
— Posted by Croc
5. Do you back up your simulation onto another drive in the case of a crash? Does that mean our universe is repeating itself over and over again up to the point of system backup, while the main simulation continues on?
— Posted by Daniel
6. Enough with the fractals everywhere. It’s a little too obvious.
— Posted by Chris
7. Make me admin!
— Posted by Visish
8. George Bush???
— Posted by geoff v
9. I have just two questions.
1. Is it 42?
2. What is the question?
I’m sure you know what I mean.
— Posted by W. H.
10. Alright, you guys – you need to turn off your video games and get outside and play!
— Posted by Richard King
11. Although your simulation is complex and filled with emotion and entertainment and education and love and religion other distractions, you ignored one question, the one question that has clouded the human mind for centuries…
Why are we here?
— Posted by Adam
12. I’m commin’ for you.
— Posted by Andrew Mass
13. can you rework the religion code? it seems to be causing some problems.
— Posted by James
14. Stop the world! I want to get off!
— Posted by Jay Orchard
15. “We, but you’re quite the curious one!”
— Posted by Lloyd David Lieberman
16. Someone needs to rescue France from its self-proclaimed malaise. Close to a quarter of its young people are unemployed, but they’re too busy burning cars to look for jobs. And good luck with names Dana and Luke!
— Posted by Dean
17. You will die, I can not! :p
— Posted by Bill Ames
18. I am waiting…
— Posted by Sparks
19. First questions:
1) Why are we here?
2) Why is there something rather than nothing?
3) What is the “global meaning” of our existence?
4) Is there something after death and if so, are we given an option to choose? On a related note, where did consciousness linger before we were born?
5) Who created you?
etc…
Now criticism:
Your world sucks! Yeah, it has lots of wonderful things in it and I understand that Utopia would be a boring place for you, but why not then put us on equal or almost equal grounds with yourself and allow us to run our own simulations, perhaps similar to yours to offset boredom but that include characters akin to video game characters rather than fully conscious human beings who you keep torturing since we first appeared here!
So, if nothing else, here’s a piece of advice on how to improve this world (as a transhumanist, it’s a no-brainer lmao): remove death, old age, diseases & suffering (both mental & physical) and give each and every human being the baseline minimum of emotional contentment (like that of a super-duper rich guy who has everything going for him and yet, who remains unspoiled by all this and brings happiness to himself and to others around him).
Obviously, you could build/simulate a limitless amount of new realms/universes/dimensions/realities (afterlives, etc) to constantly up the ante on what is currently inconceivable to us.
Oh and while you’re at it, please make sure that anyone who had ever died did not completely disappear from the universe but went elsewhere and, on the same note, anyone who is yet to be born exists in that elsewhere as well – it should provide a much-needed relief for people tormented with existential questions and an infinite array of experiences to go through even if you decide not to grant us eternal life here (by the use of technologies we will have).
— Posted by D.S
20. Dear Prime Designer:
Tho I may only be a figment of your simulation, I’d still like to thank you for my existence. But why, why did you program me with unanswerable questions? Is it for my entertainment, or yours? And why are you called by so many names? You don’t fool me, Mother Nature!
— Posted by Nicole Lieberman
21. Who created you?
— Posted by Karl Nerman
22. What you do is childish and irresponsible. This practical ontology is really getting old. Enough already! You are advanced enough to understand that we are no less real than you.
— Posted by Artemas Gruzdeff
23. Dear Prime Designer:
John Tierney has found a sect of scientists who think they have found god in the equations.
Forgive them, for they know not what they do.
— Posted by epistemology
24. Platypus: WHY?
— Posted by Matt”