Life on Alpha Centauri

[Whoha]

On the possibility that we've been overrun by robots, I'd rather that it be the Starsiege ones, not the Matrix pushovers.

[Enigma_Nova]

Originally posted by Natalinasmpf
Nothing is objective, everything is subjective.

In your subjective opinion, of course.
The way I see it, believing in subjectivity works for some people, and believing in objectivity works for others.
I apply the two beliefs where I think they work best.

I figure that beliefs are tools and utilities rather than truths or constants.
You believe something because it fits in with what you understand, and it helps with what you (both consciously and unconsciously) want.
As understandings and desires change with new beliefs, the system reformulates itself.

If you disagree, either this contradicts another belief you have, or it doesn't suit your tastes. Either way, you prove my point.
Our core beliefs tend to reinforce themselves...
These circular arguments are our personality.
From here, we get subjective processing of information - even if the information is from an objective source.

[Enigma_Nova]

Whoha
The problem with having all of us being inside a computer is that the simulation is pretty much perfect. Where are all the errors that would happen in such a system?

Found them!

[-SafaN-]

If the system is perfect, the contents would be perfect too. Since war creates many more objects and events to calculate, a perfect system wouldn't allow war, so i think war is the error

[Whoha]

Originally posted by Enigma_Nova

Found them!

har har har.

[binTravkin]

If the system is perfect, the contents would be perfect too.

Piece of code:
======
$string = your sentence above;

$res = check_possibility($string);

echo 'Possibility: ' . $res;
======
Output:
-----------------

Possibility: 0

[Natalinasmpf]

That is so subjective, and non-polymorphic.

[Whoha]

yea, add some needless polymorphism, that always makes code better

[Nabvrimn]

Originally posted by binTravkin


Piece of code:
======
$string = your sentence above;

$res = check_possibility($string);

echo 'Possibility: ' . $res;
======
Output:
-----------------

Possibility: 0

Sory, but that's a Turing Unsolvable problem you're talking about there.

[Commy]

I believe there is only one logical answer to this:

101011001011100100010110001010000101010100101

Perfect is based on perception. If we percieve something to be perfect, how can we justify that it is not. And if we did perhaps come across something perfect, would we even recognize it?

[Natalinasmpf]

Exactly! Its all subjective!

[binTravkin]

That is so subjective, and non-polymorphic.

Well, express something less subjective, please!

Btw -
1."perfect" is an artifical concept
2.Nature doesn't know "perfect" things
3."Perfect" was invented by humans to have something to aim for!

[Commy]

If I really am in a Matrix, just some brain in a tank, then God doesn't really exist, and therefore it doesn't matter what I do or if I die. All that matters is enjoying the 'life' that I have been given. IT is the reason for life. Life has no other purpose but to be living...

[Natalinasmpf]

then God doesn't really exist

Not necessarily.

Maybe its even recurring. You are a brain in a tank, which the tank is actually a simulation of another simulation of another....

Then the final layer, God exists. But all the previous layers, although self-aware, do not have souls, or isn't recorded in the book of life.

Life has no other purpose but to be living...

That without a proper higher virtue seems meaningless.

[Quezacotl06]

We should not be trying to find a society that is Utopia (perfect society), because perfection does not exist, it is a concept wrapped around your personal fancies, just multiplied thousands fold. The 7 have different versions of Utopia, because they have different visions of what a society is.
Lal--Society exists to build better lives that have meaning on either a personal, national, or idealistic level. Yang-- Society is a self-justifying system, whos functions and needs are to be fulfilled by the building blocks (people). Any action against the whole is an action against all other equals (people), and is unethical.
Morgan--Society is the product of individual cooperation, and exists as a forum of voluntary exchange between those who choose to participate in it.

You guys get the picture. From each of those definitions, their Utopia seems perfectly rational. But is the definition right?

And as for the commie, calling morgan as a society of whores and mercenaries is a punishment to the underprivleged, those who have never experienced the joy of commerce, and the rewards of wealth. Besides, I wonder if you would even be allowed to exchange ideas as we do here if tin-pot dictatorships like Yang's get their way.