I don’t think you can approximate Turing complete algorithms though. And then you end up with a situation where the simulation is making these Turing machines out of other simulated components, so it’s even more overhead then just giving the simulated agents direct CPU time.
blahsay@lemmy.world 4 months ago
It’s simple - you cheat. In computer games we only draw the things you are looking at, and we only give the appearance of simulating the whole thing but the ‘world’ or universe is actually very limited and you can’t visit most places. Sound familiar?
zbyte64@awful.systems 4 months ago
blahsay@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Turing test has been passed by ai just recently as it happens. Our computational load is trivial in the scheme of things
kakes@sh.itjust.works 4 months ago
“Turing Completeness” != “Turing Test”
Natanael@slrpnk.net 4 months ago
Even that requires overhead
blahsay@lemmy.world 4 months ago
The real problems would be x^m computational issues. A finite number of ai running around on a finite amount of space are linear problems. Basically, very possible
JonEFive@midwest.social 4 months ago
Yes, but not even close to as much as the alternative.
JonEFive@midwest.social 4 months ago
The fun thing about this is that we have evidence that this is how our reality works. The double slit experiment showed that particles change their behavior when observed. (Gross oversimplification and only under very specific circumstances but still extremely fascinating.)