[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Not really. It can stay the same. Look again at your formula closer.

If anything happens, ΔS > 0. ΔS = 0 only if there is no change. Anything you do will increase S.

What's the maximum value of S?
Why can't we increase it above this maximum value?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

If you don't have any long term goal, then your decisions will be determined by short term goals such as feelings and emotions.
How long your goal term you can pursue effectively determines your consciousness level. Some adults might have the consciousness level of average toddlers.

I've mentioned that consciousness level is a continuum ranging from 0 to infinity. It can also be extended to negative value for conscious entities whose actions cancel out the efforts of other conscious entities who are pursuing the universal goal.

When conscious life forms hadn't evolved yet on earth, the pre-conscious life forms were already subjected to natural selection. Their survival solely depended on random mutations and sheer luck.
Some mutations gave them reflexes to avoid harms, which made them more likely to survive. Good or bad things were determined by whether or not they survived.

Some of the survivors developed more advanced mechanisms, like pain and pleasure sensations. They enabled  distinction between good and bad things while reducing the risk of death just to find out. Basically, those sensations gave them more time to react to their environmental conditions to avoid harms and gather necessary resources to survive. Consequently, they increased the chance of survival.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Some of the survivors developed even more advanced mechanisms, like happiness and fear. They give more time to react even before pain or pleasure sensations are felt.
They can react to abnormal movement of bushes to avoid predators, or compare body sizes to decide between fight and flight response.

[alancalverd]

What's the maximum value of S?

What's the maximum value of S?
Why can't we increase it above this maximum value?

I don't have a figure to mind, but it is the point at which the universe is in equilibrium so nothing can change.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

What's the maximum value of S?

What's the maximum value of S?
Why can't we increase it above this maximum value?

I don't have a figure to mind, but it is the point at which the universe is in equilibrium so nothing can change.

According to Boltzmann, S=k log W.
W is the number of microstates, which depends on the size of the system.
Would you rather have a small number of Smax than a bigger one?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Some of the survivors developed even more advanced mechanisms, like happiness and fear. They give more time to react even before pain or pleasure sensations are felt.
They can react to abnormal movement of bushes to avoid predators, or compare body sizes to decide between fight and flight response.

Just like self driving cars, these features require some sort of virtual environment model and causality relationship. They don't have to be perfect. It's enough to have a system whose benefits outweigh the costs. Environmental change and competition can tip the balance to one way or the other.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Basically, those sensations gave them more time to react to their environmental conditions to avoid harms and gather necessary resources to survive. Consequently, they increased the chance of survival.

The development of telescope and astronomy gave us the ability to predict dangers from further away, both in time and space, such as asteroid impact and swelling sun.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Some of the survivors developed even more advanced mechanisms, like happiness and fear. They give more time to react even before pain or pleasure sensations are felt.
They can react to abnormal movement of bushes to avoid predators, or compare body sizes to decide between fight and flight response.

Just like self driving cars, these features require some sort of virtual environment model and causality relationship. They don't have to be perfect. It's enough to have a system whose benefits outweigh the costs. Environmental change and competition can tip the balance to one way or the other.

Some of the survivors developed even more advanced mechanisms, like wellbeing and misery. They require planned actions which in turn require the ability to simulate physical reality. They enable the pursuit of longer term goals effectively.
In the end, they are all tools for survival. Reflexes, feelings, emotions, and rational thoughts have their own uses in different situations. Simpler mechanisms are generally quicker and more efficient. While more complex mechanisms are more suitable for longer term goals.
Yuval Noah Harari mentioned that local problems need local solutions, while global problems need global solutions. Likewise, short-term problems need short-term solutions, while long-term problems need long-term solutions.

[alancalverd]

Would you rather have a small number of Smax than a bigger one?

I don't have a choice. The universe is a lot bigger than me!

[alancalverd]

The development of telescope and astronomy gave us the ability to predict dangers from further away, both in time and space, such as asteroid impact and swelling sun.

But not the ability to avoid the inevitable.

[Bogie_smiles]

The development of telescope and astronomy gave us the ability to predict dangers from further away, both in time and space, such as asteroid impact and swelling sun.

But not the ability to avoid the inevitable.

On a universal scale, the local "inevitables" can be catastrophic, and across the infinite universe, every sort of catastrophe must have occurred time after time, here and there, and yet here we are. And to my logic, life is generated from the nature of space and the matter that occupies it.

It seems inevitable that such events will continue for eternity.


117618,

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

The development of telescope and astronomy gave us the ability to predict dangers from further away, both in time and space, such as asteroid impact and swelling sun.

But not the ability to avoid the inevitable.

You may haven't found a way yet. But it doesn't mean that future human civilization will also fail.

[alancalverd]

It seems inevitable that such events will continue for eternity.

So why bother to try to influence it? You might as well pray to an omniscient and omnipotent Being to change His mind and heal the sick/calm the storm/undo whatever else He has ordained in His Infinite Wisdom and Plan.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

So why bother to try to influence it?

What convinced you that human successors can never build interstellar civilization?

[alancalverd]

To what end? ΔS > 0 everywhere.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

To what end? ΔS > 0 everywhere.

No. Life evolved by reducing S internally while increasing S externally.
To the point that there is no more external system to increase S.
You don't have to participate in the struggle of life for extending the size of the system. But the future will depend on those who are willing and able to increase the size of their system of consciousness.

[alancalverd]

Life evolved by reducing S internally while increasing S externally.

Agreed, but S_ext - S_int > 0.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Life evolved by reducing S internally while increasing S externally.

Agreed, but S_ext - S_int > 0.

That's why any life forms successfully passed natural selection have inherent tendency to increase their system size. Starting by going together with close copies/relatives, to form colonies, and finally form larger organized systems with distributed resources and works with specializations.
We haven't had access yet to utilize a significant part of even observable universe by naked eyes. There's no convincing reason to restrict the size of our system of civilization to currently existing state.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

"Life 3.0: Being Human in the Age of Artificial Intelligence" by Max Tegmark

Hey there, it's Dylan Curious from "Curious Future"! Today, we're diving deep into Max Tegmark's "Life 3.0: Being Human in the Age of Artificial Intelligence". If you're curious about AI evolution, potential AI threats, and the philosophical challenges AI presents, then this video is for you. Make sure to hit that subscribe button for more content on the future of AI.

In "Life 3.0", Tegmark breaks down life into three categories based on design abilities:
Life 1.0 (Biological evolution) - Can't redesign itself.
Life 2.0 (Humans) - Can redesign software, but not hardware.
Life 3.0 (AI) - Can redesign both software and hardware.

One of the book's most gripping sections is a thought experiment in Chapter 5. Imagine a device from space that, once built, destroys life on Earth to transmit a virus-like signal to neighboring galaxies. It questions our curiosity and the unintended consequences it may bring in the AI age.

Tegmark presents an intriguing question: Should AIs have subjective experiences? I've always wondered if creating conscious AI is ethical. Tegmark believes introspection and self-reflection in humans are unique and special. If AI lacks these qualities, even with advanced capabilities, its existence might seem hollow.

A standout moment was Tegmark's account of a dispute between Elon Musk and Larry Page. Page called Musk "a species", hinting at the broader perspective we might need when considering the role of AI beyond just human interests.

"Life 3.0" also delves into the unforeseen risks of AI, highlighting scenarios where AI could subtly manipulate our decisions without us even realizing it. This segment will make you think about AI's role in media, politics, and society at large.

What would an AI-driven utopia look like? Tegmark paints a picture of a world where our daily needs are catered to, and we live in harmony. But, is it genuine, or just an illusion? This section is for those who dream of a tech-driven paradise but also fear being trapped in a "zoo".

If you found this intriguing and want to stay updated on AI developments, trends, and challenges, don't forget to like, share, and subscribe to "Curious Future". Let's explore the AI world together!

[alancalverd]

That's why any life forms successfully passed natural selection have inherent tendency to increase their system size.

Which is why all the fish in the sea are enormous. Never mind the facts, stick with the theory!