The Problem with Simulation?

Robertnpmk · 24 Jul 2013 at 12:23

Hi,

A book I read recently by Iain Banks got me thinking:

Currently we can simulate quite complicated financial systems to predict outcomes of shares/economies and the like. These are only accurate to a certain point due to the variables that are involved and certain things we are unable to simulate. EG natural disasters.

Theoretically as processing power gets larger and larger we will be able to simulate these things with a higher level of accuracy.

Eventually we will be able to simulate people so we can predict their decisions and the affects that these will have on the situation.

This book asked the question as to what point of accuracy or simulation are these simulated people defined as sentient beings and would turning the simulation off be classed as Mass Murder?

/Hope that makes sense.

EXTRACT:

R

Robertnpmk · 24 Jul 2013 at 12:28

[FnG]magnolia;24657855 said:
Which book?

The Hydrogen Sonata, his last culture novel.

Robertnpmk · 24 Jul 2013 at 12:34

Zogger said:
Because at some point 'they' will think and behave just like real people, even though they don't have a physical manifestation in the real world. It's like creating an android with artificial intelligence so good it might as well be a person, then killing it.

This is what Im talking about. Does it change the question into a question of ethics?

Robertnpmk · 24 Jul 2013 at 12:37

Theophany said:
See I think the only argument I could come up with would be semantic - if they are truly sentient beings then can it really be defined as a simulation?

Thats a good point. you would end up running a simulation on the simulation.

Robertnpmk · 24 Jul 2013 at 12:44

G-MAN2004 said:
But it's not a real person.

At some point, (Not in my lifetime) we will be able to upload your consciousness to an android/computer. Would this stop you from being real?

Robertnpmk · 24 Jul 2013 at 12:56

arknor said:
Good luck with that I can only imagine the ridiculous storage requirements and It wouldn't be you it would be a copy of your storage.

You cant be denying that this will be possible at some point? Im not talking anytime soon. look at were we have come in the last 100 years alone.

and what do you think defines us apart from how we react to things. these are just impulses in our brains.

Robertnpmk · 24 Jul 2013 at 13:08

Kishywish said:
From the point of creation, that is now a separate individual too?

Yes erm No. This is why I have been thinking about this on and off since I read the book.

Robertnpmk · 24 Jul 2013 at 13:32

Thanks, I thought so too.

BTW don't bring this up with people at work, they might think your crazy!

Robertnpmk · 24 Jul 2013 at 14:14

Havana_UK said:
The concept of personality storage and simulation is also explored in Alastair Reynolds' Revelation Space series...if you enjoy the Culture series you'll probably like them too. Reynolds proposes three levels of simulation:
1. Gamma level (basically clever AI)
2. Beta level (behavioural modelling of a personality that effectively tries to predict how they behave in a given situation)
3. Alpha level (a complete functioning copy of a person's mind)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_in_Revelation_Space#Simulations

BTW, Banks' last Culture novel was The Hydrogen Sonata

yeah I have read all of his books to (apart from his newest one)

I actually meant The Hydrogen Sonata damn.

Robertnpmk · 24 Jul 2013 at 15:59

its an interesting debate. thanks everyone for your input.