Discussion
I've been reminded of the existence of Roko's Basilisk, or, as someone here called it once:
"When tech bros got the idea that one day, there might be a boot so big, that we have to start licking it now in case it ever exists."
(I can't remember who wrote that, but they deserve all the credit.)
Oh, 100%. Taking it at all seriously is a huge failure in any sort of thought literacy.
Oh, totally, and I do enjoy going through a good thought experiment myself, but if you look at how the basilisk was received even on Something Awful when it was first suggested just makes me want to scream 'touch grass!'
A variation on "Pascal's Wager". And flawed in much the same way.
We are asked to consider two cases: 1 "God"/"Basilisk" "Exists"/"Will Exist" (and will meet the mythological framework constructing, meaning that wrongdoing or disbelief will be punished in some afterlife (for the Basilisk, the afterlife is "when we're all uploaded into the Cloud by the Singularity)), or 2 it doesn't exist, and there is no penalty for our behavior or disbelief.
The assertion being that, regardless of the low risk, the high reward demands the faithful action.
But the sleight of hand is this: the future is not merely TWO possibilities, but INFINITE ones. The elaborately-constructed mythology is an EXTREMELY NARROW projection to the point where, barring other reasons for believing in it, it must be nearly impossible.
We might just as easily posit a God (supernatural or constructed) that PUNISHES boot-licking behavior viciously, for example. In fact, it might even be a good idea, right..?
This gotcha for the gullible is yet another reason why even technical professionals really ought to study humanities and philosophy as well as engineering and programming.