Nick Bostrom & Ros Picard • God, AI & the future of humanity: Is technology the key to immortality?

[@DigitalGnosis]

53:20 TO paraphrase "It's really important we distinguish between what is evidenced and what is speculation" ... like the contingency argument, the kalam, the resurrection of Jesus, the ontological argument, the argument from abstracta, the argument from morality, the argument from the applicability of mathematics, reformed epistemology.... etc... etc

[@wstormborn3187]

Exactly. It’s difficult to reconcile the supposed humility of accepting our limited capability to understand the basis of our universe (in a theological context: we cannot know the mind of God/creator of the universe), yet to claim the theological certainty of what the creator of the universe wants individuals in one very recent species to do

[@immanuel829]

Naturalism is a belief, too. Everyone believes some things. Abiogenesis by chance and the theory of multiverse are pure science fiction without scientific evidence. An exciting question is: Bit from it or it from bit? How can irrational chemicals generate rational thoughts? How come we have free will if we were just a bunch of atoms? And the 4 Gospels of the New Testament are ancient biographies and as such very trustworthy. E.g. why would anyone make up a God who became human who washed the feet of His disciples? You cannot oppress anyone if you take Jesus' words seriously. Plus, why are the authors of the NT so honest to admit that the disciples were quite slow-witted and afraid; that Peter even denied to know Jesus; that the first eyewitnesses of the resurrection were women? The first Christians were Jews, Jews would never worship a human being as God, let alone a crucified one. In fact, nobody would worship a crucified man, the crucifixion was regarded as ultimate defeat and utter humiliation. Something extraordinary must have happened. When Jesus Christ suffered excruciating pain on the cross He forgave His own murderers. A young muslim said: An ordinary human being would never do that. That muslim became a Christian like many others, too. Much love

[@clarkharney8649]

@@wstormborn3187 not necessarily, if one believes that the Singularity has shown itself to us and made itself known by nature and by becoming one of us

[@leafboy3269]

That is not just saying this COULD be true all of those arguments rely on philosophical evidence

[@SO3rl]

Nick - I love the beard, please keep it. Nick, you're one of the smartest people on earth, and the simulation argument is indeed one of the most revolutionary fundamental discoveries in mankind's history. I know you don't get enough credit because 99.999+% of people don't actually understand your work (I'm talking about your other work as well, like on anthropics, superintelligence, etc.). Really awkward guest to have on (the woman), as she clearly didn't understand any of Nick's work, and was quite combative to it. Nick once again shows his absolute brilliance in effortlessly conversing with people that far gone. For Nick, it's just another day at the office, but that was S tier on his part. For people who are not extremely literate on Bostrom's work, I cannot express how brilliantly he handled this woman's responses, how much accommodation he had to improvise for her whacky abstractions, such that she may have actually had a chance of understanding him. Such beautiful composure throughout the conversation; just, bravo.

[@grannit1980]

"Immortality... I'd like to take it a bit at a time and see how it goes". Wise words from Nick😉

[@DigitalGnosis]

48:00 She got sooooo defensive!

[@elliotwaite]

Thank you for setting up and hosting this conversation. I'd really enjoy hearing more of Nick Bostrom's thoughts on this channel if possible.

[@ArnauddeHerrypon]

Seconded

[@badwolf8112]

47:55 "You're a philosopher and a white male, you get away with a lot of speculation" Disgusting. What's the meaning of that? that when white males speculate, it's wrong? speculating isn't illegal, regardless of gender or race. Should it be? Does his gender or race make any difference to whether his speculation is correct or not? Half an hour before that she claimed to know all lives are equal. Is that how to treat someone as an equal? His speculation is thought through. Philosophy utilizes logic, and he laid out clearly the assumptions under which his idea would be true.

[@trygvewatne]

That was disgusting. And uncharitable and unchristian. She lost me at that point.

[@immanuel829]

To claim that irrational chemicals can generate rational thoughts, like materialists do, seems not very thought through, IMHO 😊

[@srendahl1232]

I understand your frustration, however "Disgusting" is such a loaded term and thrown around far too easily. I'd be careful putting words in her mouth - she never claimed any of those things (regarding discrimination of gender and race) and I would argue you're getting way ahead of yourself jumping to conclusions. I didn't hear her discriminate Nick for any of his positions neither accuse him of being white or male for that sake. To be honest I was quite surprised as well as a bit confused hearing Ros say that. I gave it some thought and concluded: a) It seemed like Nicks scepticism was based on a lot of assumptions with no basis what so ever - that was at least Ros' point. For the casual listened with absolutely no clue about AI, some of his statements where put forward almost as certainties, although really they would be highly speculative. Don't get me wrong, I don't think his claims were unfair and unreasonable, but neither were hers. b) I could imagine from her experience, women have to put forth more arguments, for a given position, than men do. Perhaps in the U.S. there's also a race element to it - as a dane I wouldn't know and as a white male (first time I use it, dislike this terminology already) it's perhaps not as obvious as it might be to a woman. I guess she probably has a lot of experience, though, and I'd at least give her the benefit of the doubt. Maybe she should have used other words. Anyways: I'm not trying to accuse you - don't harden your heart unnecessarily, my friend:)

[@immanuel829]

@@srendahl1232 Thank you for your thoughtful and warm-hearted comment! Kind regards from Germany 😊 Judith

[@srendahl1232]

@@immanuel829, danke! Ich wünsche dir Gottes Segen:)

[@DigitalGnosis]

Around 48:00 I find it kind of funny how she isn't happy with Nick doing speculative metaphysics, yet she herself is a Christian theist, a worldview that is an ontological slum of speculative metaphysical entities like Ha Theos, Ha Logos, Ha Parakletos, Angellos, Satan, Demons, Heaven, Hell, Souls, Saints, Divine Commands that supervene on moral actions, Natural Causal Reality + the occasional new event when God intervenes ... etc

[@Olsonic]

well said

[@DominicDSouza]

Loved how Nick Bostrom answered the questions. So great to have him helping and leading the way towards a hopeful future for humanity.

[@janwaska521]

Justin, really appreciate the good work you do offering these interesting conversations to the rest of us.

[@ataraxia7439]

Letter from Utopia by Bostrom is one of the most hopeful things I ever read. I really hope benevolent agi happens in my life time.

[@MWArcher]

This is one of the best KZbin Channels, possibly the best, on educational KZbin. I aspire to your level of balance and skill in moving the conversation forward, Justin.

[@celj92]

I was expecting to see an engaging and respectul conversation as most of times happens in Big Conversation. Sadly wasnt the case. On paper Ros was the adecuate pair to Nick, but instead of really adressing the points made by him and its implications, she limited herself to ask for "evidence" (as probably her old proud-atheist-self would be insisting with a christian) and avoid "speculation" when the topic of discution was the FUTURE!!! And that "white male" comment was disgusting. I am a christian myself and applaud Nicks intellectual honesty and patience. Bring him back. Keep up the good work Unbeliavable!!! Disclaimer: I am not white, I am mexican.

[@immanuel829]

I can't agree, Dr. Picard was spot on. The claim that irrational chemicals can generate rational thoughts is logically not very compelling. Btw, hardware and software do not happen by themselves. I think it is appropriate to point out those holes in the naturalistic worldview - in a respectful loving way, of course.

[@eugeneanderson7984]

Read the Bible before claiming to be a Christian. You obviously don’t believe in a creator. Simulation is Holly wood lies. This chick really did well.

[@TyranBatten]

I would be interested to see Nick interact with someone like William Lane Craig or another Christian Philosopher who would actually engage with the hypotheticals instead of dismissing them as improbable and lacking evidence.

[@hemetproductions]

The comment by Ros about Bostrom being a white male was a massive turn-off, as many have said. But her assertion that there's all this evidence for the God of the bible, and that in comparison, Bostrom's simulation argument was "just speculation" (without having read his wonderfully argued paper on the subject) was just absurd on top of it. Bravo to Bostrom for his patience here, and not seeing the need to answer every snarky remark. He was also kind to avoid even mentioning Picard's assertions about the 'evidence' for the Christian God. By the way: to Picard's suggestion that we have inside us a desire for immortality because we're wired for it, nothing more than basic biology is required. We have brains that are wired for our own survival. No wonder we like the idea of living forever. Any extra explanation is above requirement.

[@Rafloka]

I agree, looking back at what we know about evolution as a whole so far, one might deduce fairly logically why most if not all of our internal/instinctive traits are there in the first place. Apparently some people need a higher purpose or background in that as the notion of e.g. consciousness or compassion "just" emerging from sufficiently complex arrangements of certain matter and chemicals is too meaningless or bleak for them. All the while, much simpler lifeforms show the same instincts for survival or even what we would call sadistic behavior but in a proportionally simpler way due to their cerebral capacity. Their could (!) be a higher meaning or energy to it as well as the simulation hypothesis could be true, same probabilites here as both fall under the principle of indifference.

[@jfate2311]

why do we not have an inherent desire to be able to come back to life if we die...why is it that our inherent desire is to never die in the first place? hmmmm

[@topdog5252]

Well said

[@saratavares9159]

Thank you for sharing this very important content, freely.

[@sagittariusa2008]

Ros, you said you read the bible and found it full of 'wisdom and intelligence'. Did you ignore all the atrocities, absuridites and inconsistencies, or just cherry pick your passages? Where is your evidence, as a white female...?

[@MWArcher]

A small point, Seneca wasn't a Greek philosopher. He was a Roman philosopher born in Cordoba, Spain.

[@JohnVandivier]

They really don’t shy from asking big questions here...love it!!!

[@g0d182]

Excellent

[@janwaska521]

Listening to Nick I couldn’t tell if I was listening to a person or a very sophisticated robot.

[@topdog5252]

I was just thinking how would agi act in his situation. Calm and smart and competent

[@zhugh9556]

I am open to the idea of a mind behind the universe in whatever form that might take however I think to say that the simulation hypothesis is less parsimonious than a god is nonsense.

[@vralpal9986]

Another outstanding conversation, moderated so very helpfully by Justin.

[@janwaska521]

We still don’t have a clue what consciousness is.

[@immanuel829]

That's true. At least it seems it cannot be reduced to physics and chemistry. That would be like saying the message of a love letter can be found in the chemical composition of the ink 😊💖

[@kyjo72682]

"we" or "you"? :)

[@jfate2311]

Also, Nick when asked if he's actively considering cryogenics began his reply with, '...a lot of people...' he seems to dance around direct answers often and settles on theories and suppositions and generalizations... just an observation...

[@dumbledorelives93]

1:16:40 No, we wanna hear it! :)

[@ataraxia7439]

Nick looks like a hip college student with the facial hair and hat, I dig it.

[@watchman2866]

Is technology the key to immortality? No, the batteries ran out.

[@Addeladle-St-James]

So funny. The better alternative is to trust in the fraud god of invisible nothing. Don't worry, heaven is TOTALLY real.... Btw, there's a bridge I'd like to sell you...

[@janwaska521]

How would Nick imagine that AGI could experience what the late French singer Charles Aznavour described in the Spanish version of his song “Venecia sin ti”, where he says that the same surroundings cause radically different impressions and feelings?

[@JedidjahSlagter]

Maybe we find a way to become immortal, but than not knowing how to end it when you want it to be ended

[@johnyru]

Yes this is a problem that fascinates me. Are you suggesting that God as an immortal may not enjoy it at all?

[@JedidjahSlagter]

Check Isaiah 66:24. This is about the end of times

[@alistair_maldacena]

Wow wow wow.. the smirk on this lady's face the whole time. Bostrom is such a patient, serene type of gentleman. I would have come completely unglued when she said there's more evidence for the god of the bible than for the simulation! I had to pause and just laugh the rage away.

[@willard73]

Rosalind is imprisoned by her theological commitments and cannot allow consciousness to exist without God. She makes an arbitrary distinction about ‘real’ consciousness. Which is way beyond her (or anyone else’s) knowledge to make.

[@immanuel829]

So do you prefer panpsychism? Do stones have consciousness? Furthermore, abiogenesis points to an intelligence behind the universe.

[@immanuel829]

Naturalism is a belief system too

[@gregsmith6726]

Heard that white male comment and every thing else she says goes out the window. Lost all credibility and respect for that comment.

[@noiseforthealgorithm4668]

She sucked even before that comment. That was just the cherry on the cake

[@Addeladle-St-James]

That was what sunk it? Not the delusional belief in fantasy? Wild misinformation is fine with you, just not challenging Anglo Patriarchy. Spend the rest of your life alone in a cave or move permanently to a deserted island.

[@theonyxcodex]

A great discussion.

[@percival5207]

Wonderful conversation.

[@LaluProg]

I have seen it all…Criticising Bostrom for “speculating” and having no data while brandishing a bible (a book, even tho “successful”, still among 4000+ religions on this planet alone) at every corner of the discussion, pretending that it’s evidence etc.

[@janwaska521]

Justin moderated the conversation as well as usual.

[@connorross1]

47:55 Rosalind is a white female so she gets away with a lot of racism and sexism

[@superduck97]

Contemplating simulation theories (god driven or super intelligence driven) all seem to start with a human centered world view. One wonders how interesting ppl would find them should they understand that every human consist of gazillions of cells, where each cell has it’s own drive. And where humans are simply emergent phenomenas. As even the cells themselves are, each consisting of hundereds of millions individual parts.

[@terryblanchard5842]

She mastered the entire world via models.

[@Addeladle-St-James]

She's living in her own private Idaho

[@PaulQuantumWales]

Half of that was insufferable.

[@reda29100]

1:03:00 if we live in a planet or a moon (or whatever artificial structure) where year is a hundreds or billions of years of Earth, that won't be an issue. But then again, if we live in another planet, then why would we render an earth-ian year as a unit of time measurements (imagine why on Mars would an alien on another galaxy use Mercur-ian year just because their ancestors (or evenrn them in the oast) migrated from Mercury hundreds of thousands of years ago. It's like imagine thousands of years ago, a planet was orbiting around our planet (or seen from here) and our ancestors used a calendar based on that planet that no longer orbits or is seen from Earth at this day in age. So for future us, a birthday would be for a person living hundreds of thousands of earth years, but then if we have people living for hundreds of thousands of earth, we would have billions of grand grand grand grand ... children where the birthdays are not for 20 but billions of children, and everyone of those children is him/herself is going to another child whose birthday happens to be at that 'earth day', which doesn't solve the issue it created.

[@MoNtYbOy101]

Weird how she keeps asking where the evidence is, I wonder what she considers is her evidence that god exists

[@immanuel829]

Naturalism is a belief system, too. But your thoughts and your free will alone show that you are more than a bunch of chemicals 😊💖

[@MoNtYbOy101]

@@immanuel829 Everything in life requires a certain level of belief, this is not news, your assertion that free will cannot be a natural process isn’t backed up by any evidence however, it’s just an assertion.

[@immanuel829]

@@MoNtYbOy101 Did you answer voluntarily? 😉

[@immanuel829]

@@MoNtYbOy101 Self-consciousness cannot be examined scientifically because you cannot measure the first-person perspective. Science has always the third-person perspective. Atoms have no free will, no matter how they bump into each other. And abiogenesis by chance is pure science-fiction.

[@MoNtYbOy101]

@@immanuel829 the fact that we don’t fully understand consciousness and cannot detected it in a laboratory does not point to it being given by a god. There are many things about the natural universe that we will never understand, there’s nothing wrong with saying you don’t know how something works, it’s the only intellectually honest response.

[@marypinakat8594]

Any attempt, even in minute measure, to empower some digital system with 'consciousness' and 'capability of moral judgement' with the intention of BEING GUIDED BY THEM as we would by parents, teachers, leaders etc. ought to be mere joke.

[@terryblanchard5842]

I agree with you. I fully believe that such an attempt to digitally upload the mind of a person IS being researched now. Attempting to successfully transfer the heart and soul can never work. What a hell that might be.

[@marypinakat8594]

@@terryblanchard5842 Stay blessed☆ Hope and pray that researchers acknowledge that it is God's own gifts of intelligence and other qualities that enable them in their endeavours. If only they also sought to understand the mind and heart and the will of God with regard to their own lives. May guide and bless them.

[@terryblanchard5842]

@@marypinakat8594 Yes, I agree fully. Lots of scientist are on the fence, many tending towards Intelligent design, which for me, points directly to the Creator!

[@marypinakat8594]

@@terryblanchard5842 Yes that is how it is going. We will keep on trusting God in his kindness to lead these men and women to himself, to admit the limitedness of their works and acknowledge the supreme power of the Almighty who is also the most loving Creator Father. Thanks & big God bless☆

[@Addeladle-St-James]

Hey, it's mary and terry talking out their asses! Thanks SO much for sharing

[@magnushansson9565]

I did not know Donald Knuth was a Christian! Would be super interesting to hear his views!

[@Addeladle-St-James]

Imagine if someone said, "I did not know Donald Knuth was Hufflepuff! Would be super interesting to hear his views!" This should provide insight and perspective on the garbage dump of your mind

[@jfate2311]

energy cannot be destroyed. it can only change forms. if you deny an existence beyond this one, then you affirm that all we are is skin and bones and tangible matter... sit with yourself on this one... hmmm...

[@Addeladle-St-James]

You're using this pseudoscientific statement to leverage belief in toxic, coercive historical fantasy. You are deluded and ill.

[@lennartgrebelius9802]

Great show. Many thanks.

[@tompostma1840]

Many thanks Justin for your program and placing the Faith subject eloquently in the public sphere. Keep up the good work. 👍👍👍👍🙏

[@sagittariusa2008]

Many thanks Justin for your program placing the Science subject eloquently in the public sphere. Keep up the good work. Faith has received significantly more attention than rational subjects since the advent of the written word, and has poisoned the public sphere. 🔬🧪💊🩺🚽🧻📡🔭🧲⚗

[@Addeladle-St-James]

You may as well thank oil companies for catastrophic environmental pollution. Faith is a disease and a blight on the face of humanity

[@obakillaking5643]

I don't think Picard knows what she's talking about

[@immanuel829]

She is just a prof at the MIT... 😉 Naturalism does not make a lot of sense. How could irrational chemicals generate rational thoughts?

[@obakillaking5643]

@@immanuel829 1. Beeing a prof at MIT means nothing on its own. Normally we make fun of scientist when they debate William Lane Craig for example and they show that they dont know anything about Philosophy, but in this debate it was the Christian who didn't understand anything about philosophy. Did she even read Nicks papers? Didn't seem like it. 2. We don't know. But that doesn't mean its impossible. Also we have good inductive evidence that parts arranged in a certain way can do things the parts alone can't. For example a car can drive while its parts can't on their own. So why shouldn't chemicals arranged in a certain way be able to produce rational thoughts?

[@immanuel829]

@@obakillaking5643 Cars don't build themselves. And unguided processes aren't able to turn ink and paper into a letter, no matter how long we wait. DNA is a highly sophisticated code similar to software or language. To claim it is the result of self-organization of matter is pure meta-physics. One can believe that but it is not science. The point is: The concept of information cannot be reduced to physics and chemistry. Only an intelligence can do that. The message of a love letter is not produced by the chemicals of the ink. If thoughts were produced by atoms they wouldn't be true or false, they would just happen. Words would be meaningless. Rationality is based on the fact that YOU decide which argument is more plausible.

[@obakillaking5643]

@@immanuel829 We don't know how life started but that doesn't mean it couldn't happen by chance. We know that highly complex things can evolve from simple things. "Claiming DNA is the result of matter self organizing is pure metaphysics" I'm not claiming it is, I'm just claiming that we don't know that it isn't. If consciousness is an emergent property then information can be reduced to matter. I'm saying the burden of proof is on you (or Picard for that matter) to show that that's impossible. Picard didn't give a single logical argument for that. Also you could be a naturalist and accept that information is not reducible to mere matter if you're simply not a physicalist. "Rationality is based on people deciding which argument is more probable" I don't think that's necessarily true. If our mental states are just computation you could actually have a higher degree of trust in truth. If you can just decide which option is more probable by your free will your decision seems to be arbitrary to a certain degree. If our mental states are just algorithmic computation based on logical rules of inference however you'd have completely non arbitrary rationality *not* based on a subjective decision. I'm not even a naturalist, i believe in God. My point is that Picard did a very bad job representing us because she knows little about philosophy, she didn't engage with Nicks arguments and she didn't provide arguments for her own believe.

[@immanuel829]

@@obakillaking5643 The one who claims consciousness can "emerge" from matter has also a burden of proof that it is possible. Btw, you cannot measure consciousness scientifically, so EVERYONE believes something.

[@jonson856]

Is Ros Picard related to a certain Jean-Luc Picard?

[@ChainsGame]

57:43 Technology taking the place of religion is one way to look at it. Another way is to see religion itself as a prescient, fictional premonition of some of these increasingly likely possibilities. Is it really all that remarkable when a science fiction author gets it right about the future? It's a matter of observing trends and extrapolating to extreme conclusions, and sometimes getting it right. Or the gist of it at least. I think religious authors or storytellers are able to imagine similar possibilities and come to similar conclusions, albeit in mythic rather than scientific terms. The trends would've been far more difficult to discern under ancient constraints, and we certainly wouldn't expect them to experience visions of transistors and microchips and superintelligent machines. The biological transcendence that those technologies make possible would be seen in far more general and imaginative terms reflecting a primal kernel of genuine insight. There is a natural resonance between sci fi and religion and plenty of overlap between the two because they are often saying the same things using different vocabularies. Though obviously one big difference between science fiction and the religious genre is that, in the latter case, billions of people actually believe the stuff. And, for better or worse, they make attempts to change the world according to their mythic visions, to hasten their arrival. There's a self-fulfilling element to it as well. "Since all these things are to be dissolved in this way, what sort of persons ought you to be in leading lives of holiness and godliness, waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be set ablaze and dissolved, and the elements will melt with fire?" - 2 Peter 3:11-12

[@lixlabia]

Great conversation, but the god crap was such a pointless detour. All it does is invite debate and misleads from the actual conversation.

[@PymGordonArthur]

Thank you so much. I love this woman. Hello from Serbia. Ps. Her notorios reaction in this interview was a human one. And thats fine.

[@Lalakis]

It was totally uncalled for, showed her lack of arguments, her intellectual inferiority to a giant like Bostrom and degraded the discussion. Another overprivileged white us girl virtue signaling. She humiliated herself.

[@kyjo72682]

No, racism and sexism is NOT fine.

[@molchlurch]

Jeez, one of them comes off as really insecure in presence of the other, resorting to snark and ad hominems...

[@greggruner8890]

A very interesting discussion. I think there are fundamental differences between humans and computers, even leaving aside the big question of the soul/spirit and consciousness. Computers may become super intelligent in terms of knowledge and logic, but they can never feel pain - that is a biological function. Nor can they feel love, or hate, or worry - or anything. They don't have an instinct for survival. Yes, they can be programmed to simulate all these things, and probably simulate them very well, especially with Virtual Reality, etc. But they will never in reality feel these things, as a human would.

[@gregsmith6726]

Not yet. But eventually they’ll be better at being human than you or me. They may at some point be programmed to feel more sensation than you or me. The possibility with superintelligence is beyond our capabilities to comprehend.

[@stephenbrain3620]

Yes it is interesting! You might be right about humans and computers being completely different. But if the ability to feel pain is one of the differences, I would say: robots can see and hear. Alexa and Siri can hear a sentence and respond (mostly) intelligently - and more accurately than some humans, when it comes to questions of fact. These are primitive functions, but computers do exhibit sensory abilities. Who is to say what the limits of this are?

[@zhugh9556]

Dr Picard is obviously a very smart person but I have to say I found her overall tone off-putting. She repeatedly dismissed Bostrom's ideas as "speculation" and "lacking in evidence" which is kind of ironic coming from a Christian. I think that it can be perfectly reasonable to embrace Christianity given one's personal experiences but to act like there is not a good deal of speculation in Christian theology and apologetics is absurd.

[@Addeladle-St-James]

If your personal experiences lead you to christianization it would indicate that those same experiences either also lead you to a lot of coercion or lead you away from a basic education

[@iancallard3561]

A great contribution, even though the two conversationalists have specialised in different ways. Nick's website says he tries to identify and tackle the questions that others won't even look for - brilliant. I think that Veli-Matti Karkkainen is the only serious theologian who has grappled with transhumanism.

[@Addeladle-St-James]

Theology has nothing of value to add to the conversation any more than Harry Potter does

[@samanthacanales9102]

Gee wiz , Ros is so beautiful, lively, articulate and smart I'm surprise she is a believer and a scientist.

[@JellyBellyButter]

I found her to be incredibly defensive and condescending. Not to mention, out of her depth intellectually.

[@samanthacanales9102]

@@JellyBellyButter It maybe be that the topic is not an intellectual but a philosophical proposition. In either case she showed an inquisitive character and did not let Nick get away with his pseudo scientific pretensions.

[@fisterB]

A strange conclusion, she literally used Nick's colour and gender as an argument against him.

[@ministryofarguments5257]

When atheists like Bertrand Russell where making up imaginary teapots floating in space, theists where launching into space and landing on the Moon.

[@kyjo72682]

Atheists as well. What's your point?

[@gule88]

Facts!

[@Addeladle-St-James]

Delusion!

[@verrasimonsimon7876]

Nick, I know very hard to explain what the almighty Creator created

[@Addeladle-St-James]

The mighty god of invisible nothing! Which biblical genocide is your favorite?

[@icykenny92]

47:54 "White male" What has that to do with anything? Just listening to her, i realize Rosalind isn't very bright.

[@sergiosatelite467]

The joke's on you, Ms. Picard, the joke's on you. (A scientific brain, running on high school theology.) I'd felt my time and my person were somewhat degraded if I were Nick. But even if not exactly counted, the days of high school theology continue to dwindle. Let's check back in ten years. lol.

[@lepidoptera9337]

God certainly doesn't have a future, but AI still lacks a present. ;-)

[@Alzexza]

"your a philosopher and a white male? you get to get away with a lot of speculation? ".... really.... Well Prof Picard... MIT or not Identity politics is not something you will find in the kingdom of God. A quip like that is very disrespectful to men in general.

[@Addeladle-St-James]

It's interesting that your faith (poisonous pathology that it is) is less important to you than the status of your identity and status of your gender. That too is deeply problematic, but should serve as proof you have provided to yourself that you don't really believe the christian faith. On some level at least you are able to recognize that that garbage is obviously not true or at the very least is not of the highest importance

[@neotokiotoohigh5926]

I suppose that the subject of God, paradise, life after death is not something speculative .... subject aside the racist comment that he releases without any kind of shame. Good conversation in general, but these points took it apart a bit sincerely.

[@h54h52]

Is Nick a Sim? Just what exactly is under that head covering?

[@JamesKimSynergize]

So many comments blasting Picard for asking for evidence and then complaining there is no evidence for theism. Apparently they didn't pay attention and are expressing their own biases. This was about AI which is her field of study. She gets to ask for evidence in her field of expertise. She is not a theologian. I for one enjoyed Nick a lot but she would indeed draw him back to reality when he would go off on speculative tangents. That's all.

[@lauraconte8382]

Expertise sounds like arrogance to the uneducated fool.

[@DigitalGnosis]

Are you a Christian?

[@UncannyRicardo]

Simulation arguments are just weak applications of computation. Mathematical Platonism with apophatic monotheism is where its at

[@jacques-laurentvaillant2623]

I’m perplexed by the animosity towards Ros in the comments. I thought she was articulate and made interesting points. 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@DigitalGnosis]

Are you a Christian?

[@willire8811]

@@DigitalGnosis does it matter

[@DigitalGnosis]

@@willire8811 yes, which is why I asked

[@willire8811]

@@DigitalGnosis seems like you are trying to lump people into a category to dismiss an opinion..

[@badwolf8112]

For most of the conversation, she was.

[@Kenny-tl7ir]

Is technology the key to immortality? The answer is blatantly obvious. Why is there even a need to ask this question

[@emeco8678]

"Mathematical beauty" is just silly

[@danw9464]

Tell that to someone who enjoys maths

[@immanuel829]

Well, renowned physicists marvel about the harmony between physics and mathematics, in a random universe we would not expect that a priori 😊 and explosions normally don't increase order 😁

[@rgonzalez100]

She’s not good at this. Nice job staying composed Nick.

[@RacingMindPress]

Let's cross our collective fingers that these madmen and madwomen experience unprecedented foibles and failures in this diabolically destructive agenda.

[@svegritet]

But the AI will be your own digital twin!

[@Addeladle-St-James]

A digital twin sounds better than choosing to be in an abusive relationship with your invisible friend

[@nosteinnogate7305]

It shows how desperately she wants her delusion to be true.

[@jfate2311]

My question for anyone that believes there is no supreme God; have you ever INVESTIGATED the existence of the God of the bible? What proof do you have that God does not and could not exist? I've come across quite a few comments and replies on this thread and I just want to know how one comes to be certain about the 'non-existence' of a thing if one has never investigated or sought out a thing.... an inquiring mind would like to know...

[@Addeladle-St-James]

That's childish BS. You're asking people to disprove the existence of god when you have zero evidence FOR his existence. Religion is predicted on faith, not knowledge of facts. Educate yourself. Have YOU ever read the bible? Which genocide is your favorite?

[@macummings7818]

Yeah It's so annoying and old-hat It's also impossible to help types like this get outside of their frame and see that they have the same bias and blindness they smugly place on believers. They will not accept the validity and evidentiary bases of the Christian world view, they really won't. 🤷‍♀️

[@tatie7604]

The Brit accent gets tedious.

[@Addeladle-St-James]

Go back to little britain!

[@janwaska521]

Is Nick aware of what he is saying?

[@darrenplies9034]

More episodes with Ros please

[@noiseforthealgorithm4668]

Why have you invited her please never ever do that again

[@Addeladle-St-James]

Because the premise of the channel is to elevate primitive fantasy garbage and pretend it has any value. It's mental illness

[@janwaska521]

Sometimes Nick seemed lacking words to express his thoughts. Ros was more eloquent expressing her ideas.

[@damppp]

Well English isn't his first language

[@fisterB]

He is swedish. They are communicating in English not because it is his only language but because it is her only language.

[@timothyfoutz6147]

I do not understand how anyone can take this woman seriously. She quite simply has lost her mind. No rational person can convert to something as absurd as Christianity or worse yet Islam.

[@Addeladle-St-James]

I'm not sure which is worse

[@eugeneanderson7984]

Nick gets his check from Satan.

[@Addeladle-St-James]

That's a good example of a "job creator"

[@Addeladle-St-James]

Get a life. Oh wait, sounds like you are a believer in a faith that teaches that your hope is in death. Heaven is your home. Well, run on home.

[@janwaska521]

The eternal life that the Christian scriptures present is in timelessness. Apparently Nick hasn’t read the memo yet.

[@sagittariusa2008]

You know this as a fact? Maybe he read it and found it delusional...apparently.

[@gregsmith6726]

Lol cuz the eternal life of the Christian scriptures is 100% fact and accurate. So are unicorns and leprechauns

[@janwaska521]

Ros is right on target when referring to consciousness. Nick seems lost, oblivious. Poor guy.

[@JellyBellyButter]

Are you kidding? Nick was trying to be respectful to someone who has unintelligent beliefs. He was framing his answers so as not to offend. Listen to Sam Harris’s podcast with Nick if you’re interested in a true discussion on consciousness and AI.

[@vickioliver1098]

ABC’s of being saved Admit you are a sinner……………. Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; 1 John 1:19 “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. Believe Jesus is Lord……………. Romans 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. Call upon His Name…………….... Romans 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. JESUS LOVES YOU Isaiah 45:22 Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else. CHOOSE HEAVEN TIME IS SHORT

[@lepidoptera9337]

Says the person who doesn't know where sin is defined in the bible. ;-)

[@Addeladle-St-James]

What garbage. You have to bend over backwards to try to believe this poisonous faith. Do yourself a favor, investigate what is known about the observable universe. Learn to demand evidence and free yourself from this illness.You're delusional. Do your homework on the accuracy of the bible before you spread that filth. The Bible is full of hateful lies and has nothing of value to teach anyone about life and existence except what awful falsehoods our ancestors were afflicted with.The fictional god described in the bible is unworthy of praise. Have you ever actually read the Bible? It's Filth. The only reason people fall for it is because of the coercive threat of hell, which is totally unsubstantiated falsehood. It's the story told by a cruel child.

[@Addeladle-St-James]

Jesus is dead

[@vickioliver1098]

@@Addeladle-St-James Romans 6:9: "We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him. Jesus loves you

[@Addeladle-St-James]

@@vickioliver1098 Do christians actually believe that a supernatural being with history of periodic genocide and the traits of an abusive partner represents perfect love?