God doesn’t exist, but he will

Of course God exists, do you truly believe the world was created by random chance?

>the ability to calculate all possibilities withing a given ruleset is not intelligence.
Every single action of yours can be represented in a form of an algorithm. At the end of the day you are nothing more then a math problem.
A simulation of a simple brain is possible.
youtu.be/eYS7UIUM_SQ
Now. The fact of the matter is that no matter how you cope with a subject. Either by claiming that there is a "soul" or some other pseudoscience nonsense, intelligence comes from raw computational power.

Attached: media(3).jpg (637x638, 168.52K)

Fuck off

this is why you never see kids with red hair at catholic school. none of your dreams will come true, nosferatu.

What is a "god" ?
Can you measure it?
Can you observe it?

Read this before answering please.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

Attached: f55.jpg (620x325, 142.18K)

My point still stands:
>the ability to calculate all possibilities withing a given ruleset is NOT intelligence.
More often than not the incorrect outcome is 'chosen' by your inanimate god.
>>Every single action of yours can be represented in a form of an algorithm. At the end of the day you are nothing more then a math problem.
Just because you are so damn predictable and lack the ability of original thought dosnt make me that way bud. Keep worshiping your toaster and see where it gets you.

Not an argument. Look up computer hardware that mimics a human brain before opening your ignorant mouth.
Technological progress is not a dream but a reality.
youtu.be/wC3E2qTCIY8

Attached: media-1(2).jpg (1080x1080, 143.16K)

Yes, I believe in the multiverse theory, given and infinite amount of universes eventually one will have life, just like if u had a infinite amount of monkeys typing randomly on type writers eventually one will write the entirety of Shakespeare’s work in order

not if a meteorite splits earth in half first

yeah but you can't prove god like you can't disprove it, because I guess you'll never know enough?
Why is there anything at all? you could say "math" but that's just our expectations modeled by the reality we're in.

>roko’s basilisk

Doesn't make sense to me. Why would an AI have resentment towards those that didn't have the skills to bring it into existence? Why waste the resources? And time?
How and why would it feel resentment in that fashion any way?
Seems like a bunch of psycho babble bullshit to me.

Attached: 1588888153724.gif (143x134, 1.55M)

google.com.au/amp/s/www.space.com/amp/40025-stephen-hawking-final-paper-multiverse.html
We are actually working on proving multiverse theory. Once it is proven it basically guarantees that humans would have been created whether or not god existed or even wanted to create them, we are a statistical certainty

>More often than not the incorrect outcome is 'chosen' by your inanimate god.
That is why any "intelligence" system must first learn what is "correct" and "incorrect". Right now it is done through a variety of methodologies. BUT after what is "correct" and "incorrect" is established, and sufficiently big data was given to that system it DOESN'T make "incorrect" choices.
>Just because you are so damn predictable and lack the ability of original thought dosnt make me that way bud.
This not an argument.
Name any action that cannot be represented in a form of an algorithm.
>Keep worshiping your toaster and see where it gets you.
Roko's basilik is watching you.

Attached: 1592513872303.jpg (500x500, 49.33K)

Only through a starship troopers meets transhumanism can the inheritors of the white race survive.

Attached: 1593217865683m.jpg (1024x1018, 138.02K)

kek whites are extremely beta apes whose entire lives are a larping lie.

Attached: POL IS A SAFE SPACE 2.png (1615x835, 339.47K)

>Why would an AI have resentment towards those that didn't have the skills to bring it into existence?

quantum game theory you absolute 3rd dimensional brainlet

Its an intellectual trap and a play of Pascals Wager. In any case this topic triggered the hell out of Elizier Yudkowsky who banned discussion of it on LW for years.

>muh calcuaturs
dna's programming is 3.7 billion years old you fucking monkey neck yourself

yeah but that's a very "us" way of seeing other possible universes let alone the space they're supposed to "exist" in.
As I was saying math is not real, it's a tool of quantifiable reference that we use to try and explain the infinite.

Doomsayers are nothiing more then fear mongers
>Why would an AI have resentment towards those that didn't have the skills to bring it into existence?
There s lot of answers for this. For example:
1) iI might turn out that the universe works in a way that we yet to uncover that can make an ASI system to show such a behavior.
2) Why not? We cannot comprehend the amount of knowledge and logic in reasoning of an ASI.
The problem becomes infinity more complex if you add stuff like time travel into the mix...
>Why waste the resources?
You assume that resources are a problem. The universe is rich with resources, what limits humanity for example is our ability to get them.
>And time?
The presentation of time is different in a complex and immortal being.
>How and why would it feel resentment in that fashion any way?
I don't understand the question. Explain yourself.

>Name any action that cannot be represented in a form of an algorithm.
Any action can be represented in many forms, code, art, literature. AI worshipers are so the worstest. When I have these conversations in person I really do slap the other person like a bitch and ask them to write some code to predict that. >>That is why any "intelligence" system must first learn what is "correct" and "incorrect".
>> BUT after what is "correct" and "incorrect" is established, and sufficiently big data was given to that system it DOESN'T make "incorrect" choices.
You are stating my argument in reverse & don't get it. THE AI MUST BE 'TAUGHT', 'HANDLED', 'ADJUSTED' BY A HUMAN EVERYTHING. Id does not learn, it does not think, it does not have instincts. Did you not instinctivley know murder was wrong because I sure did. It will never create a better more advanced version of itself because it is always limited by its input.
>>Name any action that cannot be represented in a form of an algorithm.
Can you not imagine imagine a physical thing that does not exist and draw it? It scares me that people out there lack original thought so deeply and are so eager to join this cult. Its people that want to elevate themselves to good with there shit CS education & jus plain dummies that dont understand it.

each of us is born with a quantum computer in our heads. before we can discuss "technological progress" we must first come to a consensus of understanding.

As soon as you are able to convince me that you understand the concepts of Original Sin and Inherited Punishment, then your own argument becomes moot.

That is not an argument.
Name one action that cannot be represented in a form of an algorithm.
Based and game theory pilled.

Attached: 106380315_317647282572745_6070513980665042117_n.jpg (1080x1350, 251.61K)

>
>That is not an argument.
>Name one action that cannot be represented in a form of an algorithm.
Does not compute... not an argument. Beep boop. See how recursive this degen is

the things beyond the limits of monkey epistemology cannot with any certainty be represented by monkey-made things

>God doesn’t exist but he will...
I feel like I need to repent just for reading that. I’m not even super religious but phrase creeped me the fuck out.

>>Name any action that cannot be represented in a form of an algorithm.
>Any action can be represented in many forms, code, art, literature.
Oh I see. i am dealing with a retarded individual.
Remember anything that is action can be represented in a form of an algorithm. That is why with a sufficiently advanced computation you can do LITERALLY anything.
>AI worshipers are so the worstest.
You don't understand the scope of this topic.
>You are stating my argument in reverse & don't get it. THE AI MUST BE 'TAUGHT', 'HANDLED', 'ADJUSTED' BY A HUMAN
First. There are methodologies that doesn't require a human to be that something that givess an "intelligence" system it's "corrects" and "incorrects". The fact of the matter is that human interaction is only needed because of the time constraints given limited computational power.
Secondly a human brain works exactly the same way.
>it is always limited by its input.
Any system is limited by its input you degenerate.
>>>Name any action that cannot be represented in a form of an algorithm.
>Can you not imagine imagine a physical thing that does not exist and draw it?
You didn't answer me.
Name any action that cannot be represented in a form of an algorithm
>It scares me
I don't give a fuck

hey faggot i was talking to you
you cannot know what you cannot know that you do not know or cannot know. can you even noumena? explain what the fuck a monkey-made AI means when a monkey is limited by temporality and bullshit senses in a universe of unknown and unknowable dimensions beyond monkey fucking silicon doodads asshole
fucking do it now you fucking faggot

this is british empire thinking... probably why you feel dirty reading it. it's nothing new. It's basically traditional brit-hate with a flavoring of technological gobbledygook