Try to make sense of this in light of people existing in a Big World, where we survive through insertion of simulated experience in any Hubble volume, quantum immortality, the Theory of Relativity’s implied eternalism. And how do we even draw boundaries between “people” given the unitary wavefunction?:
This is basic pre-req before talking about probabilities across “branches”:
For those who still don’t understand why consciousness is not epiphenomenal: https://www.lesswrong.com/rationality/zombies-zombies
For those that don’t understand why you are eternal I made this video:
The present experience needs immediate access to neural events that happened in the past, since there is no Now of Newtonian mechanics sweeping forward. This opens up the possibility for presents with longer temporal grain than we tend to assume and also being harvested by computations far in the future:
In case you are new to the club that takes many-worlds very seriously (although I may differ with Yudkowsky in that the transactional interpretation is something I have not fully ruled out):
Watch this video using the Hansonian perspective on signaling. Being hyper-aware of the hidden motives, are you then tempted to call this behavior a form of psychosis or do you embrace the human spirit imbuing the hidden motives?:
Related to the above experiment. –Although I must say that I am far less certain about much of non-social mammal consciousness, not to mention fish. Babies don’t even know they exist. How the heck are we supposed to care about fish?… I remember when I simply assumed that all animals where conscious, but then I realized I didn’t have an argument, and was simply assuming that which felt right. Trying to craft an argument against philosophical zombies, one realizes that experience is likely to need complex self-modeling algorithms. The process of achieving fame in order to enter the rolls of history in memory is crucial for consciousness. I realized that I couldn’t divorce qualia from the historical property of having won a temporally local competition with sufficient decisiveness to linger long enough to enable recollection at some later time. In so far as we find nothing like this in fish brains or crocodiles, I should not feel the need to cast a wider net. Strangely, I’m not convinced that fish and crocodiles and frogs aren’t being used by self-modeling computations somewhere in the multiverse.
Consider this in light of open individualism:
The distinction between self and other dissolves when you apply Occam’s razor to identity and physics. Hence why open individualist humans should be expected to feel more comfortable hurting others. Yahweh hurts Jesus because it is him. As early as the 4th century, Buddhists crafted utilitarian arguments for killing people who would cause more negative karma if unchecked. This was argued from a standpoint of no-self (Anatta), emptiness(Sunyata), and compassion(Karuna). The 17th century Tibetan kingdom and Japanese Buddhists used this argument to justify their war ambitions within a Buddhist framework.
Notice the uncanny similarity between creation and annihilation operators in quantum mechanics and this: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1807.09937.pdf