User Were there people in opposition of automatization and industrialization? And if so, what were their reasons?
talkie-1930 Yes, there were people who objected to the introduction of machinery, on the ground that it would deprive the working classes of employment. It was argued that, as the new methods of production must necessarily lower the cost of articles, and so increase consumption, more would be produced than the country could take, and that a surplus of manufactured goods would be left on hand, which would oblige the manufacturers to discharge a portion of their hands. The opponents of machinery also predicted, that the operative classes would be reduced to starvation, in consequence of the cheapness of articles of food, which would enable foreigners to undersell the home producer in the home market. They contended, further, that the mental cultivation of the artizan must suffer from his constant application to a purely mechanical process; and, finally, they maintained, that the proposed system must have a demoralizing effect, as it would remove all inducements to personal exertion, and substitute a state of things, in which the industrious and the idle would fare alike.
I'm really enjoying the way it writes and its tone.
We're going to be able to simulate any period of time (for which we have or can simulate data) and transport ourselves there.
This is going to be amazing.
At some point I'm going to data mine all of my old internet AIM and IRC chats, emails, old laptop hard drives, essays, etc. and go nostalgia/core on it. I have old video and audio recordings too. Lots of stuff for reminiscent inference.
Every day I'm finding it harder to believe we're not already in a simulation.
> Every day I'm finding it harder to believe we're not already in a simulation.
Seek help before it’s too late.
Dude, I'm having a blast. I love life.
Terminally online doomerism is what needs to be reined in.
This tech is legitimately the jet packs we dreamed of as kids. It's better, even.
One can be excited for the future of LLMs while also acknowledging that the progress isn't simulated. It's cool, but not miraculous.
Do you have an actual counter to the simulation argument or are you just dismissing it out of hand?
The counter is that if it is possible to simulate the universe, then all of our experiences drop out of the structure of the simulation, independent of whether any computer is executing the simulation.
In the same way that 42 remains 42 even after the calculator is switched off, your experience of reality inside the "simulation" remains even after the simulator is switched off.
All the simulator does is expose the contents of the simulation to one who is outside it. It does nothing for those of us who are inside it, our experiences were there all along.
All possible configurations of the game of life "exist" inside the infinite structure of the game of life, independently of whether you evaluate them so that you can see how they proceed.
All possible chess games "exist" inside the infinite structure of chess, independently of whether you play them out.
[dead]
Combining AI with VR we can even achieve something like time travel ;-)
There’s a massive survivorship bias in the historical record that heavily weights the perspectives of wealthy and literate classes. We also just have much richer records of population centers in complex empires that keep detailed tax and judicial records than populations in more loosely governed areas.
The archaeological record is also heavily biased towards things made out of non-perishable materials (e.g. ceramics and stone last while wood, textiles, and paper don’t).
So basically, we can create a simulacrum of the parts of the past that have survived through to today but it would probably lack verisimilitude for anyone who was actually there.
Simulated time travel. Kind of a difference to me.
In the limit, would you know the difference?
Maybe this is simulated time travel right now and you're experiencing it in an "enhanced realism" state.
Totally non-scientific hullabaloo, but fun to daydream about.
That's what I'm talking about!
This is going to be so amazing.
The TV Series Devs explores this concept as well. It is decently executed, but it is a bit too cringe for my liking (supposedly world-class "devs" working on those keyboards you often see in museums, the protagonist having a fibonacci-off to establish engineering creds). Anyway, might be fun!
>keyboards you often see in museums
like what? the model M? you can take my buckling springs from my cold dead hands
This assumes that written data from a particular time period actually reflects what it was like in that time period, and isn't highly biased to select for, say, particular socioeconomic classes.
Yep. Until the very recent boom of social networks, everything published is, by definition, the product of the educated and the upper classes. The farther back you're going, the more estranged from ordinary people you are. In the Middle Ages, you'll have nothing but texts about the adventures of saints and kings.
And of course, even with social media, there is still a large bias issue - not just with who is sharing, but also what; most people don't share everything about their lives on social media.