₦airaland Forum

LordReed:
Laughing implies mocking. I am not aware of anyone who mocked Musk for starting a space exploration Co.

See below

LordReed:
You said velocity should have been infinite so I am asking if you know of anything that is infinite.

See below.
Can you envision coming to the end of space, where there is no empty space on the other side? Same with time

LordReed:
What evidence do you have for anything that is infinite?

Meaning what?

LordReed:
And where in that video was NDT laughing? How is someone giving a personal opinion in a serious manner, laughing? Do you imagine that at everything you start something everybody is going to say you'll succeed?

You obviously haven’t followed. Google people who laughed at Musk including Russians

LordReed:
He's the only one you're a fanboy of. I mentioned Gates but you're not a fanboy of Gates so it didn't even register. LoL.

I gave you references, provide a reference where Gates was preoccupied with dangers of AI like Musk, I’m always open to correction

LordReed:
What reason should there be no limit?

Common sense, logic, classic physics - if light travels on a bus going 90m/hr it ought be 90m/hr faster, but it is not. The more force you apply the faster something ought go till infinity

LordReed:
LMFAO! Kai! What a fanboy. You have now developed papal reverence for Musk. Bwahahahahaha!

Who was laughing at him? See below


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGx16XABgaI

LordReed:
Other electromagnetic phenomenon are that speed, I dunno why light is making you giddy. Radio waves propagate at that speed as well for instance.

Stop acting dumb, because u r not. Point is there is a speed limit in the universe - and there is no logical reason why there should be one.
Not wether electrons and photons also have speed of light!

LordReed:
LMFAO! If anything those guys are even better than Musk because they didn't have the privilege of seeing some of the things Musk has seen. And besides there is no AI researcher that hasn't read Alan Turing so it is not inconceivable Musk already got his concerns from Turing's work.

When did Musk start going into space? And who was laughing at him? And do know how many billion dollars in he has gotten from NASA and the US military?

It is different saying something in theory, not knowing quite what u r talking about, than saying something you’ve seen and KNOW, and you are the only one of your contemporaries seriously warning about it!

LordReed:
Like how does Neil DeGrasse Tyson acknowledging Musk's prowess mean that Musk is right about our universe being a simulation? Appeal to authority and non sequitur fallacies.

Point is, the man seems to have insight into our universe that, to me, seems to have come from outside the earth, to have been handed to him somehow

LordReed:
Even when it is a vacuum light can be affected by gravity so the speed will change but dumbass like you doesn't know that but you're just regurgitating what you read with no understanding.

It is completely about measurement because if you're within the gravity field when that light speed changes you will not see the change but if you were outside it you'll see the change.

It's not my fault that you're trying to take shortcuts with these things because you want to use it to prove your nonsense. I will always drag you until you acknowledge your errors but of course once you do that then your narrative falls apart doesn't it. LMFAO!

My friend, there is a speed limit in the universe (which logically shouldn’t be the case), and light is already at that speed - which is why you can’t increase it’s speed no matter what you do. If you still don’t understand, tell me and I’ll explain further

LordReed:
I said people have been warning about AI since the early 20th century and you asked for example of previous Internet and you are now saying it has to be a contemporary of Musk. Do you actually reason out the things you write? I have shown that people have been warning about AI for some time now so your Musk fanboyism is pretty pathetic.

FYI Gates is also a critic of AI.

Well someone in the 1950’s warning of dangers of social media is quite different from someone warning of it now. But it’s not only that, the Musk guy is VERY CONFIDENTLY prescient about many things. I mean the man said 15 years ago that there’d soon be only driverless vehicles. People laughed at him. He put his money there. Same with space - people laughed and told him only Governments, NASA, did that not individuals

LordReed:
One of the earliest authors to express serious concern that highly advanced machines might pose existential risks to humanity was the novelist Samuel Butler, who wrote the following in his 1863 essay Darwin among the Machines:[11]

The upshot is simply a question of time, but that the time will come when the machines will hold the real supremacy over the world and its inhabitants is what no person of a truly philosophic mind can for a moment question.

In 1951, computer scientist Alan Turing wrote an article titled Intelligent Machinery, A Heretical Theory, in which he proposed that artificial general intelligences would likely "take control" of the world as they became more intelligent than human beings:

Let us now assume, for the sake of argument, that [intelligent] machines are a genuine possibility, and look at the consequences of constructing them... There would be no question of the machines dying, and they would be able to converse with each other to sharpen their wits. At some stage therefore we should have to expect the machines to take control, in the way that is mentioned in Samuel Butler's "Erewhon".[12]

Finally, in 1965, I. J. Good originated the concept now known as an "intelligence explosion"; he also stated that the risks were underappreciated:[13]

Let an ultraintelligent machine be defined as a machine that can far surpass all the intellectual activities of any man however clever. Since the design of machines is one of these intellectual activities, an ultraintelligent machine could design even better machines; there would then unquestionably be an 'intelligence explosion', and the intelligence of man would be left far behind. Thus the first ultraintelligent machine is the last invention that man need ever make, provided that the machine is docile enough to tell us how to keep it under control. It is curious that this point is made so seldom outside of science fiction. It is sometimes worthwhile to take science fiction seriously.[14]

If I’m not mistaken none of the people you mentioned is a contemporary of Musk or even alive. How many of our current people, from Jack Ma of Alibaba to Gates to Bezos to US presidents, how many of them have you seen express any anxiety about AI??
All I know is, this Musk knows something, and he knows it for certain, and that knowledge is not from here

LordReed:
How is does this mean it is outside physics when Einstein reconciled this deficiency with his theories of relativity? Is Einstein's theories no longer physics? Boy, you are out of your depth, just stop embarrassing yourself. LMFAO!

Do you even read my screenshots. See the circled below. IT IS OUTSIDE COASSICAL PHYSICS!!

LordReed:
I said the constancy of the speed of light is not that it is always constant, not even in vacuum is it always constant but it refers to the methods of measurement.

The speed of light is not constant everywhere in the universe that is what yoiu don't understand and your misunderstanding is fueling your delusions. Read and cure your ignorance: https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SpeedOfLight/speed_of_light.html

You are the one talking nonsense. Even though the observer can not see the light only you with your caveman antics thinks it means the light has zero velocity, anyone with a decent understanding knows that the light has only been redirected. Caveman watching Matrix. LMFAO!

I thought you’ve stopped talking nonsense. YOU ARE WRONG! Has nothing to do with method of measurement. I don’t know if you missed this part of your reference (see below).

Stop talking like an infant or we can’t discuss. Of course light is redirected in any situation that’s not a vacuum. Do we consider that when we say light slowed down? No. We have to assume we both know certain things or we can’t discuss. When we talk of speed of light we are not talking of all the deflections and refractions

LordReed:
LMFAO! How is light outside of physics for Andromeda's sake? Stopping talking all these loquacious beer parlour nonsense.

In traditional physics things are logical. Let’s say light is shined from rest the speed will be C as measured by someone at rest. Logically, if light is shined from a car moving at 90m/hr, it’s speed should be C + 90. That’s logic, that’s traditional physics, and it’s true for everything in the universe EXCEPT LIGHT. With light the speed stays C, no more, no less!

LordReed:
LMFAO! Many people have been pointing out the dangers of uncontrolled AI since the early 20th century, I dunno why Musk saying it is making you giddy. Beside Musk did not make his money in AI so what has his his money making skill got to do with it.

Stop with the fanboyism and cultivate understanding and reasoning.

Mention another notable person who started warning about AI even b4 internet.
Below is an acknowledged genius astro physicist. Is he also a fanboy?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXcgBfi4xxo

LordReed:
You obviously like being spoon fed hence all this appeal to authority. Has Elon Musk gone outside the universe to see the simulators? Don't be freaking patsy, man.

LMFAO! Musk is even talking about the danger of AI in the video so how does that mean we are in a simulation? Are you even using your brain at all?

The man was talking about this years ago. The man is the richest in the world based on knowing exactly what will happen on earth. If someone bets ALL his money on a thing and wins you can be sure someone tipped him off.
That’s what Musk did. Watch him below. He’s talking like someone who has SEEN it or has been handed info from an infallible source


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0BIcv1Nwc0

LordReed:
How can they deduce that we are in a simulation running on a processor but fail to account for what that means. Do you need to be spoon fed everything that you think?

The fact that the speed of light exists outside physics and logic is a tip-off of some sort of simulation and the closest thing they can relate it to is a processor. Doesn’t mean it is a processor exactly as we know it

LordReed:
You don't even understand what you seeing. The concept is no matter what speed you are when you take the measurement the speed of light is constant. So even if you where moving at close to c the light will still be c. Learn how to understand instead of just quoting websites you don't understand.

That the light doesn't get to the observer doesn't mean its speed has turned to zero. You are just an airhead making useless arguments.

That’s exactly what u disagreed with in your post, have you forgotten? Here’s what you wrote verbatim:
“what you don't understand is there are not talking about what the speed is but how it is measured“.
Bottom line: in our reality speed is relative EXCEPT the speed of light, which is constant for everything in the universe.

Stop arguing nonsense. We were talking about atmosphere slowing down light towards a direction and I used the extreme case of wall stopping it entirely TOWARDS THAT DIRECTION.
Stop talking dumb

LordReed:
No you are the one not having the discussion with because you don't seem to use the organ between your ears. You are saying that the speed of light is constant therefore it shows that it's a simulation, what you don't understand is there are not talking about what the speed is but how it is measured. You don't even understand the concepts you are trying to discussion so how are you worth discussing with.

Also when you put a wall the speed of light doesn't turn to zero, instead the light reflects off the wall which is why you can see the wall because the light is come into your eyes from the wall. If it turned to zero then walls will always be black or invisible. You don't understand scientific concepts, it is obvious.

About it being only the measurement of speed of light, YOU ARE WRONG. See below.

Stop talking nonsense - if you put a wall you stop the light from going forward, which is what we are talking about - it will never get to the person on other side of the wall

LordReed:
Kai! This one don kolo. LMFAO!

All I know is some of these people know something the rest of humanity don’t, and I believe this knowledge was handed to them somehow. Here’s Musk


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jkRcrM6XKA

LordReed:
Dummy here is you with a complete failure of cogitative reasoning. You just said you have no way of knowing how things work outside yet you know that this is a simulation working on a processor. How dumb are you really?

We are back to your Matrix reaction.
They ONLY used the speed of light to deduce that we are likely in a simulation. That’s ALL. They didn’t then go into their increasing the speed or their source of energy or such They’d be fools if they did.

LordReed:
During a 2016 debate at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City, Harvard University physicist Lisa Randall said the odds that the simulation hypothesis is correct are “effectively zero.”
https://www.amnh.org/explore/news-blogs/podcasts/2016-isaac-asimov-memorial-debate-is-the-universe-a-simulation

There is an even smarter person telling you to stop being deluded.

Look at him, you are talking of debates. We are talking of people who seem to have info FROM OUTSIDE OUR WORLD and have used that info to amass billions in REAL LIFE. People whom their colleagues are convinced are aliens. People who have insight into the nature of our universe that we mere humans just don’t have!

LordReed:
What we know about computing is that processor speed improves over time. So if the hard limit of the so called processor is manifesting as light then you effectively saying your so called simulators have dead ended their processors and are no longer improving their processor speed. It sounds more like a hard limit on your reasoning faculties.

The other problem is of the energy required to run a simulation. That energy cost would be ginormous for a simulation of this fidelity. So if you link this with the previous point you'll see that there is zero chance this is a simulation. Because if they were expending energy to simulate primates who can feel their rectums distended as feces passes through it with such exquisite detail then they would have expended that energy towards improving their processor speed which in turn would have removed the so called artifact.

What you FreeIgboho need to do is learn how to actually reason instead of relying on articles you barely comprehend.

Like I said, sometimes I’m not sure u folks are worth having this discussion with. This is actually one of the dumber posts I’ve seen. YOU ARE INSIDE THE SYSTEM! You have NO WAY of knowing how things work outside the simulation. Probably beyond anything you can ever imagine. Shouldn’t that be obvious even to an elementary school pupil??

LordReed:
Do you even understand what they mean by the speed of light is constant. I doubt you do. If you did you would not use it as a yardstick for your simulation fantasy. Light slows down in certain medium like air and water so how can it be evidence for your delusion. LoLz

Sometimes I’m not sure u folks are worth having this discussion with. We, OF COURSE, mean speed of light in a vacuum or close to it as possible!! That goes without saying! If you put a wall to block the light, the speed will be zero!

LordReed:
LoL! So have people way smarter than you determined that there is no evidence of your delusions. And I am glad I am one of such people. KnownUnknown

The speed of light is such a HUGE tip-off that we are in a simulation that u wonder that it wasn’t better camouflaged.

I mean the damned thing exists outside physics and common sense. No matter your own speed the speed of light stays constant. And nothing in the universe can exceed that speed. Plus other strange properties of the speed of light - just as if it were the speed of the processor running our sumulation

LordReed:
LoL! So have people way smarter than you determined that there is no evidence of your delusions. And I am glad I am one of such people. KnownUnknown

The below is by people who actually build simulated worlds and have insight you don’t have! (See screenshot)

Confirmed! We Live in a Simulation
We must never doubt Elon Musk again
* By Fouad Khan on April 1, 2021

All computing hardware leaves an artifact of its existence within the world of the simulation it is running. This artifact is the processor speed. If for a moment we imagine that we are a software program running on a computing machine, the only and inevitable artifact of the hardware supporting us, within our world, would be the processor speed. All other laws we would experience would be the laws of the simulation or the software we are a part of. If we were a Sim or a Grand Theft Auto character these would be the laws of the game. But anything we do would also be constrained by the processor speed no matter the laws of the game. No matter how complete the simulation is, the processor speed would intervene in the operations of the simulation.

If we live in a simulation, then our universe should also have such an artifact. We can now begin to articulate some properties of this artifact that would help us in our search for such an artifact in our universe.
* The artifact is as an additional component of every operation that is unaffected by the magnitude of the variables being operated upon and is irrelevant within the simulated reality until a maximum variable size is observed.
* The artifact presents itself in the simulated world as an upper limit.
* The artifact cannot be explained by underlying mechanistic laws of the simulated universe. It has to be accepted as an assumption or “given” within the operating laws of the simulated universe.
* The effect of the artifact or the anomaly is absolute. No exceptions.
Now that we have some defining features of the artifact, of course it becomes clear what the artifact manifests itself as within our universe. The artifact is manifested as the speed of light.

LordReed:
You were the one who brought up cogito ergo sum so how is it my problem if you think it is fallacious? LoL!

It would part of the discussion - you have no way of proving that even you yourself exist

LordReed:
YOU are the one saying there are beings control us not me. LoL!

You know fully well I never said any such thing. I always said we have NO WAY of being sure what it is we don’t know we don’t know.

KnownUnknown:
Elon Musk is another non-authority your type like to cite. Cite what the man did to support your assertions, don’t just name drop and expect someone who doesn’t place people on a pedestal to acknowledge them.

Well he became the richest man in the world by far by foreseeing that almost all our vehicles will soon be electric and self-driving, and also that man needs to colonize other planets for what we call consciousness to survive. Also merging of AI and humans (Neurolink). He got all this from being a voracious consumer of sci-fi when he was younger.

LordReed:
The problem is YOU don't stop at analogy. You actually believe this is the case, that there is some mindfuck control-from-beyond-space going on with no evidence except the fucking movie you like to talk about. LoL!

I STOPPED at the analogy. You are the one who keeps talking of Smiths and what Neo can do. All I was illustrating with the movie is that just as Neo had NO WAY of independently knowing he was living in a dream, same COULD be our case. THAT’S ALL.
I don’t understand your obsession with the movie.