Hacker News Reader

The foundation of simulation theory relies on a quantitative probability argument. It says by extremely high probability we live in a simulation. This is the logic that is hard to dispute. Your arguments here are not addressing that.

Weirdly it sort of relies on moores law. Just look it up. If you want to refute the theory you need to attack the main argument. The main argument sounds wrong but at the same time is hard to logically unjustify.

View on HN

> This is the logic that is hard to dispute. Your arguments here are not addressing that

> If you want to refute the theory you need to attack the main argument

I did not mean to address any arguments for or against simulation. And definitely did not want to refute the theory.

Where did you get that idea?

I am just saying to be careful about assuming too much about the world that is running the simulation in case we live in one.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com