tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post6574909120990747329..comments2023-09-27T07:44:19.769-04:00Comments on Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: Thinking the UnthinkableSabine Hossenfelderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comBlogger25125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-27054575810106270212012-03-14T17:22:55.630-04:002012-03-14T17:22:55.630-04:00Well, I guess you could say that the climate debat...Well, I guess you could say that the climate debate, global warming so to speak, and the policies established from it is a useful method to learn from. If I recall, although I can't remember the source, there was a performed study on global policy making with diplomats from each country playing the role as policy makers which yielded no agreement on any new policies. Which only leaves Computerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08043469121103688617noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-69889867128789165682012-03-14T16:55:31.365-04:002012-03-14T16:55:31.365-04:00But we should be aware when we are engaging in men...<i>But we should be aware when we are engaging in mental masturbation that has no chance of accomplishing a useful goal.</i><br /><br />After reading that my last sentence I realized I was being too pessimistic. If we suddenly hear paroxysms of ecstasy in the blogosphere coming from Martin Rees and Nick Bostrom we will know that their mental masturbation has indeed accomplished a useful goal.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08213251864943443334noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-22050162765682256932012-03-14T16:28:35.420-04:002012-03-14T16:28:35.420-04:00Hi Bee,
What really bothers me about thinking the ...Hi Bee,<br />What really bothers me about thinking the unthinkable is the wasteful use of intellectual resources. I wish people would focus on things occurring in the future that do not require a whole host of contingent assumptions for any given proposed final result. The old saying "if my mother had wheels she'd be a trolley" sort of sums the worth of these discussion up.<br /><Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08213251864943443334noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-37899820421701104002012-03-14T04:30:52.642-04:002012-03-14T04:30:52.642-04:00Hi Mud,
I am not only talking about risk manageme...Hi Mud,<br /><br />I am not only talking about risk management, though that's part of it. I simply mean we can talk all day long about the risk of extinction, in the end it won't matter because nobody will pay attention. There's no mechanism by which any scientific consideration (including the inevitable uncertainties) is integrated into our political system. There's just this Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-82761140872753905662012-03-14T04:26:13.066-04:002012-03-14T04:26:13.066-04:00Dear Arun,
Yes, insurances deal with mortality of...Dear Arun,<br /><br />Yes, insurances deal with mortality of individuals, but that only makes sense because the beneficiaries are not the deceased themselves. I'll be happy to insure you and everybody else on the planet against the extinction of the human race for as little as $10 per month. Best,<br /><br />B.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-47869970776097105232012-03-13T19:35:34.174-04:002012-03-13T19:35:34.174-04:00"I therefore think that the main challenge we..."I therefore think that the main challenge we are facing is not to quantify existential risks, but how to integrate scientific insights - these and others - into our social and political systems."<br /><br />In accordance with this topic you are speaking of risk management - no? Risk management for whom?Computerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08043469121103688617noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-82301058546999712802012-03-13T17:43:24.750-04:002012-03-13T17:43:24.750-04:00It's possible that the robots will keep a few ...It's possible that the robots will keep a few humans around for sentimental purposes - if they happen to be sentimental. Actually it's possible that they already are doing that, and most (all?) of the what we perceive to be other people are already simulations designed to provide us with a quasi-natural environment. Or perhaps we are all now just simulations.CapitalistImperialistPighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17523405806602731435noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-61272842465729756252012-03-13T17:34:22.411-04:002012-03-13T17:34:22.411-04:00If you don't like thinking about human extinct...If you don't like thinking about human extinction, think e.g., - what is the probability of tigers going extinct?<br /><br />Quote: "A research project designed to model the effects of tiger poaching in Russia and India by John S. Kenney of Maine's Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife has determined via computer modeling that even a small increase in poaching drastically Arunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03451666670728177970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-63209374484208293822012-03-13T17:31:32.445-04:002012-03-13T17:31:32.445-04:00The probability of an extinction is not the same a...<i>The probability of an extinction is not the same as the probability in a horse race, since a horse has a certain probability due to its results in the previous races, while in the case of the Earth there is only one race, which is in progress. </i><br /><br />Well, even races of horses running for the first time in a race get odds. Probabilities of unrepeatable events have a meaning.<br /><br Arunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03451666670728177970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-55875454816082362462012-03-13T16:44:17.573-04:002012-03-13T16:44:17.573-04:00Cassandra by ABBA<a href="http://youtu.be/Os_bSwg02J4" rel="nofollow">Cassandra by ABBA</a>CapitalistImperialistPighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17523405806602731435noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-60026823094932732732012-03-13T16:04:03.200-04:002012-03-13T16:04:03.200-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.CapitalistImperialistPighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17523405806602731435noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-90450250721134924292012-03-13T12:56:29.294-04:002012-03-13T12:56:29.294-04:00'Dead' de Sitter, definitely my favourite ...'Dead' de Sitter, definitely my favourite space.<br /><br />No observers no problems. Boltzmann Brains don't count.Giotishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03594944884584261018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-6044306303239414032012-03-13T12:54:07.006-04:002012-03-13T12:54:07.006-04:00Ah, no, there's a race every day and so far we...Ah, no, there's a race every day and so far we won all of them. The difficulty with comparing the probability of extinction with odds in a horse race is that it's pointless betting anything else than we'll win tomorrow too, it's a lose-lose situation.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-16111499213566929062012-03-13T12:38:37.969-04:002012-03-13T12:38:37.969-04:00The probability of an extinction is not the same a...The probability of an extinction is not the same as the probability in a horse race, since a horse has a certain probability due to its results in the previous races, while in the case of the Earth there is only one race, which is in progress.A. Mikovichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03175906801121515444noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-65090843894150586992012-03-13T12:08:33.350-04:002012-03-13T12:08:33.350-04:00"most people prefer not to think too much abo..."<i>most people prefer not to think too much about the extinction of the human race. Yet somebody has to do it.</i>" Thinking or extincting? 1) Quality matters, 2) reproduction always wins. We have abandoned (1) for (2). Classical Greek rational democracy, risk and culling, is "unfair." Scattered gifts, profuse punishment, and ignorance stabilize feudalism. The only Uncle Alhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05056804084187606211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-13593529398375358052012-03-13T12:06:07.437-04:002012-03-13T12:06:07.437-04:00"most people prefer not to think too much abo..."<i>most people prefer not to think too much about the extinction of the human race. Yet somebody has to do it.</i>" Thinking or extincting? 1) Quality matters, 2) reproduction always wins. We have abandoned (1) for (2). Classical Greek rational democracy, risk and culling, is "unfair." Scattered gifts, profuse punishment, and ignorance stabilize feudalism. The only Uncle Alhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05056804084187606211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-54231893069689493412012-03-13T08:48:02.279-04:002012-03-13T08:48:02.279-04:00The meaning of probability here (of human extincti...The meaning of probability here (of human extinction) has the same meaning as the odds in a horse race.Arunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03451666670728177970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-18503667453884014442012-03-13T07:39:12.595-04:002012-03-13T07:39:12.595-04:00Hi Bee,
My least favourite probability based pred...Hi Bee,<br /><br />My least favourite probability based predictions are those used to forecast the weather, such as there is a 50% chance of rain, as I’m not certain why it’s cast in the context of a warning as if something undesirable. My way of looking at all this is its hard enough to deal with the present as to be overly concerned with the future; or in other words the best we can do is toPhil Warnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15671311338712852659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-2468584708712806482012-03-13T04:40:02.748-04:002012-03-13T04:40:02.748-04:00Hi A. Mikovic,
Yes, that's right. That's ...Hi A. Mikovic,<br /><br />Yes, that's right. That's why I wrote the only point I can see in putting forward these numbers is as a quantification for how well we're doing, with the aim of keeping the numbers down. Best,<br /><br />B.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-60276649946562167072012-03-13T04:36:59.605-04:002012-03-13T04:36:59.605-04:00My problem with the statement "the risk of hu...My problem with the statement "the risk of human extinction by 2100 is 19%" is that it can not be checked, and this type of probabilities are meaningless. Since the meaning of probability is a frequency of a measurement, then checking such a statement would entail to finding an ensemble of 100 identical Earths, and waiting 90 years or less in each case in order to detect an extinction A. Mikovichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03175906801121515444noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-74927635857435563132012-03-13T04:07:41.840-04:002012-03-13T04:07:41.840-04:00Dear Arun,
Yes, I would agree, sustainability see...Dear Arun,<br /><br />Yes, I would agree, sustainability seems a rational requirement. However, two problems with this:<br /><br />1) It is possible to temporarily live unsustainable, and this might be justified in some circumstances, but under which? We presently don't live sustainable, and then this brings the question how and how quickly do we have to work towards sustainability, and who Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-10142892069898766862012-03-12T22:52:03.436-04:002012-03-12T22:52:03.436-04:00Arun:
with respect to your "So imagine, say,...Arun:<br /><br />with respect to your "So imagine, say, a forest, that can regenerate at 2% per year."<br /><br />See;<br /><br />"Replacing coal with wood: sustainable, eco-neutral, conservation harvest of natural tree-fall in old-growth forests"<br /><br />http://www.springerlink.com/openurl.asp?genre=article&id=doi:10.1007/s10584-009-9625-z <br /><br />and<br /><br />&Len Ornsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04568887650614008628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-81425075783829302172012-03-12T19:07:03.752-04:002012-03-12T19:07:03.752-04:00Cassandra (from beyond the grave):
"The cel...Cassandra (from beyond the grave): <br /><br />"The celebrity physicists, one by one are going insane, e.g., Nielsen, Tegmark, Kaku, Kane, Susskind, and a large number of non-celebrity theoretical physicists. Science is in peril!"<br /><br />;)Robert L. Oldershawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15396555790655312393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-42737604854861196802012-03-12T14:22:15.029-04:002012-03-12T14:22:15.029-04:00So imagine, say, a forest, that can regenerate at ...So imagine, say, a forest, that can regenerate at 2% per year. Allowing for things like forest fires, and insect infestations, say, cutting about 1.5% of the forest per year can be sustained indefinitely, because regeneration covers the amount we cut.<br /><br />Is it a legitimate aspiration for someone to want a quality of life that requires cutting 10% of the forest per year?Arunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03451666670728177970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-32599475521665223422012-03-12T14:16:54.575-04:002012-03-12T14:16:54.575-04:00The underlying issue is intricate because we can&#...<i>The underlying issue is intricate because we can't just count heads, we also have to take into account quality of life and the multitude of people's opinions of what constitutes good life.</i><br /><br />Hi Bee,<br /><br />Lot of food for thought here. I think the key question is whether it is legitimate to want a quality of life that is not sustainable (by the environment, resource Arunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03451666670728177970noreply@blogger.com