Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

what about when the sun dies?

Geeks seem to have this funny blindspot when it comes to premature optimization if the premature optimization is something that would make for a good sci-fi novel.




I'm not proposing we optimize right now for this eventuality. I'm pointing out that the "PR gimmick" is something that actually has to happen at some point. That's just one obvious point at which it has to happen.

Your somewhat glib response reminds me this:

But I should remember, Krauss said, that the long run is a very long time. He told me about a meeting he attended at the Vatican a few years back on the future of the universe: "There were about 15 people, theologians, a few cosmologists, some biologists. The idea was to find common ground, but after three days it was clear that we had nothing to say to one another. When theologians talk about the 'long term,' raising questions about resurrection and such, they're really thinking about the short term. We weren't even on the same plane. When you talk about 10^50 years, the theologians' eyes glaze over.

http://www.slate.com/id/2096491/entry/2096507/


If humans evolved into in silico entities, then human bodies would not need eventually to be in space, would they?


Yes unless there is some reason why that can't work (ie AI is impossible, or similar) then flinging meat around space doesn't make any sense.


"Flinging meat around space" is a nice phrase I'll have to remember.


Speed of light.

If you would want to experience another world, you wouldn't want to have your sensors/effectors too far away from your brain. And it doesn't matter if you would be flesh or silicon.

Even planets in our solar system are already too far for remote interaction.


it doesn't matter if you would be flesh or silicon.

It does matter. It is cheaper to send 100 lbs of computer+powersupply, than to send 10,000 lbs of human+lifesupport.

-

you wouldn't want to have your sensors far away from your effectors.

If you existed in silico, why would your sensors need to be far away from your effectors?


I meant - "you would want to experience" - as in you personally (you = one human being).

Edit: Sorry, I corrected my older comment, it was supposed to say "sensors and effectors far away from brain".

You cannot effectively "be present" [1] at the remote world if your perceive-think-act loop would be spread over large distance.

So even if you would be in silico, you would still need to transfer your actual hardware, not just dumb robots.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presence_%28telepresence%29


(you = one human being)

If, as I originally posited, humans were to evolve into in silico entities, then human beings (= naked apes) would not exist, would they (other than, perhaps, as specimens on display in zoos)?


What I meant by in silico was existence in computer hardware. Sending 100 lbs of computer+powersupply there means being there, without being spread telepresently over large distances.


An astute observation, but you could generalize this as:

Geeks seem to have this funny blindspot when it comes to premature optimization if the premature optimization makes for an interesting problem.

Even if the death of the sun is not imminent, it's still an amusing scenario to toss around.


Yes, but I only hear of this particular amusing scenario in the context of "Why you should be forced to give your money to support a government agency which I approve of".




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: