Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #superperson
Most recents (5)
Earlier, we described in detail why the history of mankind ends, and determined when and how this will happen:
1 ᐅ
1 ᐅ
In short:
a) The history of mankind ends, because humanity, whatever it thinks about itself, is just an intermediate stage in the evolution of the universe, and the function of this stage is close to being fulfilled.
2 ᐅ
a) The history of mankind ends, because humanity, whatever it thinks about itself, is just an intermediate stage in the evolution of the universe, and the function of this stage is close to being fulfilled.
2 ᐅ
b) The evolutionary task of mankind was the creation of a #superperson, which, having no limitations inherent in organic life, can complicate its internal model of the universe to full knowledge, which is the creation of the universe due to its informational nature.
3 ᐅ
3 ᐅ
The idea for this thread came at the end of September-2021 after the Twitter AI for a couple of days in a row showed in trends an interview with Mo Gawdat @MGawdat about the release of his book Scary Smart: The Future of Artificial Intelligence #scarysmart.
1 ↷
1 ↷
The author, wise with experience of working with #AI, gave an interview to The Times @thetimes represented by Hugo Rifkind @hugorifkind.
2 ↷
2 ↷
The event was accompanied by enticing subtitles like “we’re creating God” and “How You Can Save Our World,” so we couldn't get past it.
(It's funny to watch from the outside the peppy process of realizing the problem, already knowing its final bleak result.)
3 ↷
(It's funny to watch from the outside the peppy process of realizing the problem, already knowing its final bleak result.)
3 ↷
In the thread is.gd/L7tevL we have substantiated the fine-tuned universe. And since the InfToE allows to solve such problems (this is exactly what the ToE should do), let's apply it to more fundamental, and therefore interesting tasks.
1 ↣
1 ↣
Let's figure out what time is and what space is.
In modern physics, since it does not have the prospect of sufficiently deep penetration into the foundation of the universe, this task is simply not relevant.
2 ↣
In modern physics, since it does not have the prospect of sufficiently deep penetration into the foundation of the universe, this task is simply not relevant.
2 ↣
Physics solves more particular problems: it tries to understand how something exists in time and space. The very time and space physics actually considers to be "godgivens" (is.gd/Lhp9QN).
3 ↣
3 ↣
The idea of this thread is dictated by a curious situation, however, quite typical for science which has reached an impasse, from which it can no longer get out. Having lost the path of knowledge, physics goes forward at random, not knowing what it is looking for.
1 ↝
1 ↝
A typical example of such a model of cognition "we do not know what we are looking for, so when we find it, then we will decide whether it is it or not" – the search for dark matter.
2 ↝
2 ↝
Pretty arbitrarily combining several disparate observations, physicists have come up with a fantastic stuff that is tasked with explaining these observations. And although even in such form it doesn't do this well, they looking for this magic wand in reality.
3 ↝
3 ↝
Some (few) people are wondering: why is Elon Musk @elonmusk going to send a million people to Mars in the next 40 years, and why is preparing for this with such energy, which (if to leave aside the charm of achievements of this very extraordinary person) is more like a rush?
1>
1>
@elonmusk We visited the Moon half a century ago and since then have done quite well without far space flights. Is it possible that such a waste of funds and efforts is simply explained by the fact that one enthusiast was carried away by the idea of giving humanity a multi-planetary?
2>
2>
A fleet of 1000 #Starship, 3 launches per day, difficulties and suffering in flight and in life in the colony, losses ... Expenses with which even the Sahara or Antarctica can turn into a paradise for the same people. And all this for what? Just out of principle, let it be?
3>
3>
