this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2024
84 points (100.0% liked)

Ask Lemmy

27218 readers
2060 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I don't mean an application of technology. Or a specific fact. I'm interested in more big picture things.

top 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 47 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I was astonished by the Great Green Wall Initiative in Africa. The plan is to create a continent-spanning wall of vegetation to prevent the Sahara Desert from expanding southward. It is nothing if not ambitious.

Apparently, the first phase is to create huge number of these tiny plots shaped in a special way to prevent rainwater from running off and planting drought-hardy native species in them, some of which can be harvested as a food source. Eventually, once the soil has recovered sufficiently, they can plant trees.

The initiative is high-tech in the sense of applying state-of-the-art knowledge on land management but low-tech in the sense that it will involve a whole lot of manual labour with simple implements.

But the scope of it is insane with 22 countries having signed on. It gives me hope that collective action in the face of climate change is possible anywhere in the world.

[–] SgtAStrawberry 1 points 9 months ago

I thought it was to prevent the desert going north, but regardless it is a cool thing.

[–] ShittyBeatlesFCPres 22 points 9 months ago

The idea that consciousness is an emergent phenomenon from less complex things working together. There’s no evidence of, for instance, a city or bee hive having “consciousness” so it’s philosophical, not scientific, but the idea appeals to me.

I think it appeals to me because it’s a bottom up approach to something we usually think of as top down. Emergence in general is very common in nature. Ants aren’t sophisticated but ant colonies can be surprisingly complex. Maybe it’s the same with our cells.

[–] EndlessApollo 20 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

People care about thought crimes, but not thought virtues. People often judge themselves and others unnecessarily harshly for having impure thoughts, but never praise others for wanting to do good things but not doing them/not being able to. Doesn't seem very fair to me, it sucks how easy it is to latch on to bad thoughts and ideas, even when never acted upon. It's a thing I've struggled with ever since I started being more self aware of my flaws, and this thought makes it a little easier to not give so much weight to my shitty thoughts

[–] Boozilla 16 points 9 months ago (5 children)

The "Dark Forest" hypothesis of the universe. It's not at all new, but it's new to me. I find it pretty interesting. Though my personal 2-cent take on the Fermi paradox is quite different.

[–] damnthefilibuster 6 points 9 months ago

Dark forest was indeed mind bending to me. I’ve never thought of it like that and the novels just blew me away.

[–] piotrm 3 points 9 months ago

What is that personal take?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

The dark forest hypothesis is the conjecture that many alien civilizations exist throughout the universe, but they are both silent and hostile, maintaining their undetectability for fear of being destroyed by another hostile and undetected civilization. Wikipedia

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

On top of that: the “dark forest” trajectory of the internet.

https://youtu.be/JrcbH0ge2WE

[–] [email protected] 12 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

“If God is all-good, he can’t be all-powerful, and if he’s all-powerful, he can’t be all-good.”

I know this is just a retread of a philosophical idea that’s been around for centuries (if not millennia), but something about the way it’s phrased really grabbed my attention and made me seriously consider it.

The closest comparison I can think of is hearing a song that’s just okay, but years later hearing a cover that’s simply incredible.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

This is what made me leave religion tbh. This notion right here.

"Why do bad things happen?"

Because God has a plan for us, and he needs us to go through this for his plan to work

"But... he's all powerful. He could change the plan and we could have the same outcome. He's infinite, which means there's infinite ways that he could achieve the same thing.... but we wouldn't suffer"

He's either all-good, which means he can't choose what happens and he just tries to do good - but that means he's not all powerful. Or he's all powerful, but then he is choosing not to do the good things.

So I landed on "If there's a god, then maybe he/she is just trying their best, and hey, that's okay, I'm just going to try my best too."

[–] rezz 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I’ve not heard this way with “goodness” — I think the scientific way is that he can be omnipotent or omniscient, but not both. Their coexistence is a logical contradiction. Since omnipotence suggests a free will whereas omniscience is determinism.

[–] Rhynoplaz 3 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Omniscience may not be seeing a predetermined future, but rather the knowledge of every repercussion of every possible action you could make.

Such a being could actively make choices, while knowing the future, and all other possible futures that they chose to avoid.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I lean towards this view of omniscience, if only because I can’t handle the fact that every aspect of my life is predetermined.

[–] rezz 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

FWIW I do not believe determinism can be real in any practical sense. Even if it is provably true, it’s not actually practically applicable in anyway because it is describing an inaccessible layer of physics, to us anyway. The “layer” above our determined one would necessarily have to be non-determined to have ignited the determined “sub-reality” of ours.

[–] rezz 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I would contend that what you’re describing cannot be knowledge. Knowledge is a certainty by definition. It is “known.” Probability trees are a web of the unknown. “Knowing” the tree =/= knowing reality. Probability is not real, just as numbers are not real. They are concepts. They do not fall into the realm of known reality/experience/matter. You describing knowing that 2 + 2 = 4 conceptually. You are not describing the knowledge of the four trees in your lawn, of which there is only one instance.

[–] Rhynoplaz 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

But we're talking about the omniscience of an all powerful entity that can create and destroy universes on a whim. Of course it's beyond our abilities, just as dogs aren't building steam engines, we aren't looking at multiple timelines when we make decisions. 🤷🏻‍♂️

[–] rezz 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I guess I am not communicating well enough but you’ve summarized the real question of this definition well: is the being within, or without our universe?

If above, then there is no contradiction. If they’re within our universe proper, on “our level” then there is a contradiction that can’t exist.

The power to create and destroy universes cannot come from within this universe. Hence this debate is rendered moot, if that is the premise that they are not within our universe/physics.

And there is only a true point in this type of discussion if you’re talking about what is applicable within our known universe.

[–] Rhynoplaz 1 points 9 months ago

Yeah, I understood you, I just didn't agree that omniscience and omnipotence could not possibly coexist.

[–] bhmnscmm 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

You don’t have a soul, Doctor. You are a soul. You have a body, temporarily.

Reading that quote made me reflect on the distinctions between body, soul, and consciousness in a new way.

It's from the book A Canticle For Leibowitz for anyone curious.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Excellent book. I’ve read it several times, but not recently.

[–] bhmnscmm 2 points 9 months ago

It really is a fantastic book. I'm a sucker for mid-20th century nuclear apocalypse literature, but this book is in a league of its own.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago

first thing that came up for me is The Egg.

For me, it's an "anecdotal" or "more relatable" golden rule so it's nothing really new. The interesting part was how it ties cosmic beings and rebirth cycles.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago

Neutral Monism. Particularly applied to whether an AI that acts sufficiently human would necessarily experience consciousness.

You can add onto that Virtue Ethics, applied to the question of whether an AI which acts human but is not conscious ought to be treated as if it were conscious anyway — because to do otherwise would damage one’s moral character.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago

Learning about Daoism has been pretty cool though I can only really read the Dao De Jing because there are no temples near me. Buddhism is way more wind spread and easily accessible comparatively speaking. It is also how Lao Tzu and Siddhartha Gautama come to many similar conclusions about suffering and leading a good life.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

Here's the bigger picture - or the self-actualization I have reached - you & I are the universe, on a journey that spans billions of years, we have come alive just for a few decades at most, in a way for the universe to experience itself, & experience we do, but we lack awareness of who we are (one / the universe), what we have (here & now), & what we truly yearn (experience the universe / connect with each other). Everything else is Leela, the most engaging movie or play you ever saw. It is so gripping, we can't look away, but it's just a show!

[–] sleep_deprived 3 points 9 months ago

I was very intrigued by a follow-up to the recent numberphile video about divergent series. It was a return to the idea that the sum of the integers greater than zero can be assigned the value -1/12. There were some places this could be used, but as far as I know it was viewed as shaky math by a lot of experts.

As far as I recall the story goes something like this: now, using a new technique Terrence Tao found, a team was seemingly able to "fix" previous infinities in quantum field theory - there's a certain way to make at least some divergent series work out to being a real number, and the presenter proposed that this can be explained as the universe "protecting us" from the infinities inherent in the math.

It made me think about other places infinities show up in modern physics (namely, singularities in general relativity) and whether a technique something like this could "solve" them without a whole new framework like string theory is.

[–] j4k3 2 points 9 months ago

Organic compute: growing digital technology

[–] rezz 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Moore’s law and exponential technological progress viewed from the wider frame of biological evolution, and “the singularity,” are pretty compelling and likely upon first hearing them. They’re many nutters around it but Kurzweil earlier books on it are quite sound.

[–] SpeedLimit55 1 points 9 months ago

The ancient Hindu texts known as The Vedas possess elements common to both quantum physics and the concept of Synchronicity.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Dialetheism is the view that some contradictions (i.e. p and not-p) are true. The argument for this is based on the liar's paradox:

This sentence is false.

If you follow the logic through, you get the conclusion that it is both true and false. It requires some changes to Frege-Russell-style classical logic to be coherent, but it allows one to solve almost all paradoxes in one philosophical move. For example, you can have naive set comprehension principles

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I was revisiting one of those old childhood truths recently about the philosophy of common sense. Someone had asked a question twice about what people gravitate to when it comes to trust, and the answers reinforced a fear I've often had. There are lessons that might make you appreciate humanity, and then there are those which make me not want to be a normal human being because of seemingly intrinsic behavioral entailments.

[–] PoliticallyIncorrect 1 points 9 months ago

Biological engineering