Last month, Elon Musk speculated we were all just characters in an ancestor simulation that future generations would run because for some reason they would want to create billions of expertly rendered artificial life forms and then subject them to poverty, war, crime and various other plagues.
And just this week analysts from Bank of America decided not to bother figuring out why their shitty bank consistently comes in last on J.D. Power surveys of mortgage customers, but instead issued a statement that there’s a 20%-50% chance our reality is just a simulation.
At first, I wrote this silly speculation off as just another example of babbling bullshit from science fiction obsessed smart guys who want to seem a little smarter than they are.
After all, they stopped building a road near my house because it threatened the habitat of some faggy little frog. Do you really expect me to believe future generations would have no problem creating genocide simulations on life forms that they’ve specifically created to feel pain?
Aside from the actual movie, these dopey Matrix arguments go back to The Simulation Argument put forward in 2003 by Swedish philosopher Nick Bostrom. In it, he speculated a loop of simulations spawning simulations, and if you have trillions of simulations, the math favors we’re in one.
Aside from the ethical arguments and staggering power requirements, here’s where the math really fails.
Last weekend I rented a mini-excavator to build a small goldfish pond for my wife. As I got progressively drunker while operating it, I decided to see just how deep of a hole I could dig before it ran out of gas.
For the record it was about 9-and-a-half feet, and I refuse to believe any simulation would render every inch of soil in a nearly ten-foot-deep hole behind my house on the one-in-a billion chance my drunk ass would dig it all up. Surely, you’d run into video game style invisible walls before that happened.