My thought is that I'm not going to bother reading that shit because the simulation argument is garbage, which renders this hypothesis garbage as well.

I consider it likely that a multiverse exists, which means that a complete mathematical description of our universe exists "on its own". The fact that this description also exists nested within other universes, as a "simulation", is irrelevant to the behavior of agents who are mathematical substructures within their universe. No reasonable agent is going to care that their epic space battles exceed the AWS budget of some subset of the infinitely many simulations of their universe.

(You could presumably attempt an anti-materialist argument that math alone is insufficient to create conscious entities who perceive a flow of time, but this would also disprove the sIMuLaTIon ArGUmeNt.)

>Thoughts?
As amusing as it may be to contemplate the idea we inhabit a universe designed by Tarn Adams, I find it unconvincing.

Once understood the universe is isomorphic, such that in understanding how things work locally one also sufficiently understands how things work everywhere else, there is little point to physical exploration. Once a civilization understands how to exploit the entirety of matter and energy in a single solar system it's hard to see why they would want to expand.

Is humanity hell bent on expansion? Two thirds of the surface of the Earth is water. If we are such hardcore absolutists about spreading out, we would have colonized the oceans by now. That is a feat far easier to accomplish than nineteenth century styled space colonies of light speed limited interstellar empires. Or, even, just our own moon.

For myself, the Fermi paradox solution is made of twin ideas: limited localized plenty is enough, and we ourselves here on Earth are not worth anyone else's attention. Not worth that attention now for certain, and most likely forevermore.

Plus, you know, once we figure out how to build an immersive virtual reality fully simulating an all female alien invasion of sexy, pervy, anthropomorphic rat-folk intent on turning the Earth into a femdom prison planet for the hapless hairless monkey population ... well. There won't be any enthusiasm left over for screaming HERESY! and fighting epic interstellar genocidal wars. No enthusiasm that is, except for occasional nostalgia-fags returning to earlier versions of what should be another initial blockbuster V/R product line, as I suspect it will be.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1806.02404 suggests the fermi paradox is just a math error resulting from rounding the continuous estimates to point estimates too soon, and we're just alone.

>>6740
Ted Kaczynski has an interesting theory to explain the Fermi Paradox.

>But once self-propagating systems have attained global scale, two crucial differences emerge. The first difference is in the number of individuals from among which the "fittest" are selected. Self-prop systems sufficiently big and powerful to be plausible contenders for global dominance will probably number in the dozens, or possibly in the hundreds; they certainly will not number in the millions. With so few individuals from among which to select the "fittest," it seems safe to say that the process of natural selection will be inefficient in promoting the fitness for survival of the dominant global self-prop systems. It should also be noted that among biological organisms, species that consist of a relatively small number of large individuals are more vulnerable to extinction than species that consist of a large number of small individuals. Though the analogy between biological organisms and self-propagating systems of human beings is far from perfect, still the prospect for viability of a world-system based on the dominance of a few global self-prop systems does not look encouraging.
>The second difference is that in the absence of rapid, worldwide transportation and communication, the breakdown or the destructive action of a small-scale self-prop system has only local repercussions. Outside the limited zone where such a self-prop system has been active there will be other self-prop systems among which the process of evolution through natural selection will continue. But where rapid, worldwide transportation and communication have led to the emergence of global self-prop systems, the breakdown or the destructive action of any one such system can shake the whole world-system. Consequently, in the process of trial and error that is evolution through natural selection, it is highly probable that after only a relatively small number of "trials" resulting in "errors," the world-system will break down or will be so severely disrupted that none of the world's larger or more complex self-prop systems will be able to survive. Thus, for such self-prop systems, the trial-and-error process comes to an end; evolution through natural selection cannot continue long enough to create global self-prop systems possessing the subtle and sophisticated mechanisms that prevent destructive internal competition within complex biological organisms.
> Meanwhile, fierce competition among global self-prop systems will have led to such drastic and rapid alterations in the Earth's climate, the composition of its atmosphere, the chemistry of its oceans, and so forth, that the effect on the biosphere will be devastating. In Part IV of the present chapter we will carry this line of inquiry further: We will argue that if the development of the technological world-system is allowed to proceed to its logical conclusion, then in all probability the Earth will be left a dead planet-a planet on which nothing will remain alive except, maybe, some of the simplest organisms-certain bacteria, algae, etc.-that are capable of surviving under extreme conditions.
>The theory we've outlined here provides a plausible explanation for the so-called Fermi Paradox. It is believed that there should be numerous planets on which technologically advanced civilizations have evolved, and which are not so remote from us that we could not by this time have detected their radio transmissions. The Fermi Paradox consists in the fact that our astronomers have never yet been able to detect any radio signals that seem to have originated from an intelligent extraterrestrial source.

>>6765
Robin Hanson had this to say about it:
http://www.overcomingbias.com/2018/01/kaczynskis-collapse-theory.html

>>6766
>'n-no, dude!! Kaczynski was just wrong because I said so!! trust the elites, they won't screw us all over!!'

Robin Hanson is a fucking retard.