Came to post Superintelligence if it wasn't here already.

Also The Sequences.

Okay, good talk. Be well!

You are the one who keeps insisting that everything on a digital system is a simulation.

I keep asking how do you know everything on a digital system is a simulation?

Can you please answer my question, instead of reiterating your claim?

Will? The prior on that is not sufficient to rise to the level that I would call belief.

Can? Yes.

That is a claim. What is the evidence for that claim?

I can't, yet. I do not think that you have sufficient evidence to claim that it cannot be done, merely that we do not yet know a way to do so.

I did not say "simulating". I said consciousness and exist.

So, there is no compelling reason that consciousness cannot exist within a digital system?

And a heavier than air plane will never fly. After all, how can it flap the wings fast enough?

What knowledge, exactly, are you claiming, that lets you be so certain of this?

Do you understand consciousness well enough to explain it such that no mystery remains?

> Computers can't be; a machine being conscious would be different than digital computers.

How do you know that? What evidence has led you to this conclusion other than, "It's different."? Do you know that at various times and places various humans have been regarded as not being conscious because, "They're different."? What actual evidence do you have of this? Have you constructed a model of a conscious mind on a digital computer and have it fail to display consciousness? How did you discern whether it did or didn't? How do you know your model was accurate? How do I know any being in this universe aside from myself is conscious in a solid and grounded way, rather than just making the assumption?

It is, in fact. You don't have any evidence to support the claim, "Machines can never be conscious individuals," you've simply asserted it to be the case. Or do you in fact have an evidence supported hypothesis about consciousness adequate for building novel ones?

If your income generation exceeds your output, why would it?

The point of investing properly is that it generates income. You aren't just chipping away at your principal, you live on the interest / dividends. So, barring societal collapse, actually it can last indefinitely, or even grow if you've done your job well.

You know you can like, save money and make investments, right? I know people who have retired before 40, on salaries they made working for someone else.