1y ago

Could you resist a true virtual reality and should you?

Lets assume we develop the capacity to create virtual worlds that are near indistinguishable from the real world. We hook you up into a machine and you now find yourself in what effectively is a paraller reality where you get to be the king of your own universe (if you so desire). Nothing is off limits - everything you've ever dreamt of is possible. You can be the only person there, you can populate it with unconscious AI that appears consciouss or you can have other people visit your world and you can visit theirs aswell as spend time in "public worlds" with millions of other real people.

Would you try it and do you think you'd prefer it over real world? Do you see it as a negative from individual perspective if significant part of the population basically spend their entire lives there?

102 comments

Fully would. As long as there is no massive downside IRL.
If I could have any experience I wanted and see all the things in the universe without like, living half my life span or my descendants being farmed for fertilizer, then for sure.
The one downside is there would be minimal knowledge gain. Unless that's also part of the virtual world.
- There would be a huge downside in the real world.
  The real world would seem dull, boring and depressing. As you cannot have that rich experience as in that virtual world.
  A bit like drugs. It would create a dependence which would increase indefinitely until it would be extremely hard to live anything in the real world.
  
  It's not obvious to me that this would be a downside. Real world already is dull and depressing to many people. If they can be happy in the virtual world then that seems like an improvement to the status quo

This proposition feels like drugs without the physical side effects. If I’m [Edit: not] happy with the world I live in, I should try to make it better. Diving into a world without racism, climate change, pollution, or people with radically opposing views while we solve none of these problems in the real world isn’t healthy, I think.
- you’re assuming though that the virtual worlds wouldn’t help to solve (or at least make irrelevant) those things
  virtual worlds would likely be significantly more efficient than reality: if you don’t need to make physical products because you only need software and 3d models, manufacturing for most things just evaporates… less extracting resources from the earth, less energy spent refining resources and assembling parts, etc… no need for lighting, entertainment and social venues, office space… people would need far smaller houses so when they do need to travel, it’s probably going to be somewhere much closer to them - and for that matter, why travel?
  perhaps lots of our worlds problems fall away when people can have whatever they like - when we aren’t competing with each other, and exist in a (virtual) world of plenty, perhaps some of societies more intractable problems will just cease to be problems. i’m not saying that would happen, and i don’t have any citations, but i’d say it’s certainly possible
  what’s so special about the real world? if your experiences are fundamentally the same thing, why does it matter if it’s a real or a virtual experience? certainly there are things we can’t do virtually - scientific advancement and generally discovery likely requires some interaction with the real world, but even than could be done via interfaces to the outside world rather than specifically existing all the time in the real world
  
  This reminds me of the conversation at the end of Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, and I think the arguments for and against are effectively the same.
  Come to think of it Huxley would have had a lot to say about VR if it’d been around in his day.
  
  you’re assuming though that the virtual worlds wouldn’t help to solve (or at least make irrelevant) those things
  Correct, I didn’t go as far as OP with the proposition of “virtual worlds that are near indistinguishable from the real world”. With that assumption your arguments invalidate my concerns.
- Diving into a world without racism, climate change, pollution, or people with radically opposing views while we solve none of these problems in the real world isn’t healthy, I think.
  And that's assuming that nobody will create VR world's where the oppressed groups are tortured or target for hunting practice.

To expand on this, one thing I haven’t seen in the comments yet, is how pivotal and amazing this would be for the handicapped and disabled community. I myself have a broken body and being able to do things in VR that I can’t in the physical world would be incredible.
- I mean, seeing as this is not yet a reality.. Have you looked into lucid dreaming?
  
  Actually I have, but as soon as I realize I’m dreaming, I instantly wake up. So annoying!
  
  This makes me wonder, how often do people's disabilities manifest in their dreams? Presumably the rates would be different for those born with their disability and those who got it through illness or injury later in life.

Assumptions:
Stasis: When i spend months inside VR, my meat prison does not degrade faster than it would have leading my current livestyle. So at least something like the Matrix. Mind Upload would be perfect.
Variety: The VR is large enough i will not get bored for at least 50 years.
Control: The VR device is owned and operated by me, without requiring connection to some corporation. My VR life is owned by me. So no Corporate Dystopia. I can end the VR any time i want.
Immersion: I can choose my avatar, the graphics is good and i can set the amount of pain i want to experience.
Affordable: I can financially afford to stay in VR for at least 50 years.
Positives:
Exciting: Every day can be an adventure. The best food can be copy-pasted. Have a house in the woods without having to sacrifice amenities. See the world without pollution. Dive trough oceans without having to catch your breath.
Much less suffering: No more exercise (unlike my meat prison my avatar does not need exercise). No unwanted pain: Set pain to off if you don't want to feel exthaustion, stubbing your toes,... No more disease, No worrying about wrecking your body.
No more physics: Meals will remain fresh and warm even after weeks of hiking/climbing in the snow. Teleportation will be available.
Negatives:
?
If such VR is ever achieved, almoset everyone will live in it, and those living in it will look back and ask themselves how humans were ever happy to live like we do today.
- I agree. Possible explanation to Fermi's paradox (where are all the aliens?) is that they're enjoying their lives in virtual worlds
- Negatives: real world stagnation.
  But maybe that's a positive actually.
  I can see the line of reasoning and honestly I would probably be an early adopter.
  
  There is no invention (that i can imagine) i would look forward to if Mind Upload VR was real.
  That would mean stagnation, but progress is only good if it reduces suffering. And i just can not see how making faster computers and learning physics can reduce suffering if there is Mind Upload VR, where all pain is optional.
  As long as the VR is more like a Matrix where the body still ages and dies, of course i would want research to continue so death does not rip me from my awesome virtual life before i have played it trough. Maybe even multiple times.
  I agree that progress will most likely slow down once Matrix VR is real because why waste your precious years lerning physics and biology when there is affordable VR?
  Once Mind Upload VR is there i can actually see science progressing much faster, because if you have a processor that can simulate one conciousness and be loaded 10%, you can either put 9 more people on it, or you could speed up time 10x, so the mind that is researching new technology will experience 10x more time than real time and be done with research much faster.
  Or you could store yourself on disk and wait 1000 years to have science catch up.

I like holding my wife and daughter too much for this to be truly tempting.
- What if they were there with you?

It all the depends on the how and the what.
First of all, if the virtual reality is able to replicate physical sensation indistinguishably from the physical world, it's not virtual, then, is it? Then it's just alternative reality. If that was the case, the only dilemma would be the implications to the physical world. Will your body still exist, or are we talking San Junipero here?
As long as there are implications to the real world, then I believe a significant percentage of people will not abandon it, because of empathy.
I personally would only live an alternative reality if there was no one I love back in the real world anymore, or if I were to die.
As for virtual reality in the realm of possibilities, there will always be something missing, as addictive as it may be, so there will always be something to bring you back to reality
As for just trying it, hell yeah! As long as there are no negative consequences physically that I know of before hand.

Absolutely plug me in and solder in the connection. Real life is a treadmill of misery.
- Who's going to pay the service costs to keep you in there uninterrupted?
  
  Well, in a world that has technology this advanced, you could maybe make your body do actual work in the real world (controlled by your employer) but you would still experience the virtual world as op has explained.
  Sounds like a black mirror outline. I shiver at the idea.
  
  Lets hope I can dialate my perception of time and block out the outside world or its going to be a short life.

I would love to immerse myself in the digital worlds like in Ready Player One. You could live in the cheapest and shittiest place possible but still have a blast with your virtual avatar and haptic suit. But, instead, we got the Metaverse with Zuck's low res trees and Eiffel tower lol

I'd be a thousand percent down if I didn't think it'd be a subscription service that only exists to exploit me

Once I can pick and choose my body and change it on a whim, and it feels like my body, Im gonna end up staying in VR unhealthily much.
Even with the tech we have today, when I first used VR and selected a body for something like VRChat, I started feeling like the body was my own. You know the "fake hand" experiment? Something like that. But the illusion is quickly destroyed as soon as I touch something or movement dont match up. And the effect gets weaker for each time.
It was such a cool feeling. I want it again.

You are actually describing my “ideal” world as I outlined here!
My vision is heavily inspired by Terence McKenna. I imagine a world as it might have existed during prehistoric times. Lush forests teeming with exotic wildlife, clean air, and crystal clear water. No highways full of billboards, no parking lots, no shopping malls, and no cars. Just safe grounds and paths for humans embedded deep within all of this nature. At a birds-eye view, it may look as if humanity has completely abandoned technology and regressed back into its childhood. Yet if you were to look out through the eyes of one of these utopian people, you would see the most wonderful augmented reality display. Information, communication, entertainment, education, global economies… almost everything has been de-materialized. Humanity’s ceaseless pursuit of technology has been mostly divorced from our physical environment and mother earth is bustling with life again. The only technologies that remain in the real world are those that help all of us live happy and healthy lives (modern medicine, delicious food, solar power, etc) all the while the shared virtual reality in our eyes is limited only by our collective imaginations. We are finally living in accord with nature without having to forsake our innate desire for knowledge and progress.
- Corporations: not on our watch!
- A very cool vision, but people would still have to live and grow food somewhere, and generate absurd amounts of energy. Assuming we can do vertical hydroponics and cold fusion, the centers of human civilization could be massive, but isolated and surrounded by unspoiled nature.
  The question, then, is what stops people from multiplying endlessly and covering the planet in fusion-fueled mega-structures?
  
  Education in the form of a cultivated social desire to live in harmony with our planet and not overpopulate it? I’m really not sure! I know I’m a romantic but a boy can dream. There has to be a more sustainable way for humans to live on earth though. Virtualization or dematerialization is the most realistic way for us to have our cake and eat it too.
  
  Our declining birth rate, presumably

This idea of complete control over your reality reminds me of the book/novella The Metamorphosis of Prime Intellect. Suffice it to say the story suggests that such a reality would ultimately be meaningless.
I would say it sounds great though, even if eventually it gets really depressing.
- Been a while since I've seen that referenced! Glad it's still up.
- I did not read the book, but I can imagine it being interesting for a bit. I don't know how would someone react to something like this however.
  Maybe it can become meaningless, tho maybe if people still need to get into the real world to work, maybe it would become a way to escape the real world.
  Which would make that once you get out in the real world, life may seem bad and depressing compared to that virtual world.
  It would maybe generate undesirable effects and people would be in that reality for days (ex : what was imagined in Ready Player One). Create an increase in depressions and suicide rates...

Yes, I would want to resist it. Life is about ups and downs, and I think the better idea would be to have an open-source augmented reality, maybe through glasses that you wear or contacts on your eyes, that can project shared images, like virtual props that everyone else can see, or just act as a VR HMD and replace all your vision with a virtual world for a while.
But bodily autonomy is very important, give people a choice and let them be informed by publishing the source code, PCB diagrams and all that kinda stuff so they know how it works and that they're not being controlled.

You know, I feel like it would all seem pretty vacuous to me pretty fast. Maybe there'd be more opportunity in the real world as everyone dips into simulation, though.

Sign me up!

Here is an article on a book of a professor of philosophy and neural science about this subject :
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/jan/17/virtual-reality-is-genuine-reality-so-embrace-it-says-us-philosopher

The needs of body must be met and then the rest of my time is fair game. I mean being legit healthy not mainlining soylent.
- I agree with the principle of what you're saying, but a 100% soylent diet is actually perfectly fine, and genuinely much healthier than what almost anybody eats otherwise. It's really good stuff. (assuming you are talking about the real-life name-brand stuff, not the literary version)

Reminds me of a short story, where a girl is sent to a VR planet, for robots studying humans
There she has a.. VR coffin, which she slowly learns can perfectly simulate reality, or the AI will send probes for her to experience things in reality.
She eventually realizes that they will make perfect human proxies, and starts to plan her escape from her VR coffin
Wish I could remember the name!

We are in a virtual world.
Continuous macro geometry which suddenly converts to discrete units when free agents interact or observe it?
Sounds a lot like how we're currently building voxel-based procedurally generated worlds where a continuous seed function determines geometry which is converted into discrete units to be able to track state changes by free agents to what's initially determined by the seed function.
We even have sync conflicts and lazy optimization in how it handles tracking these changes.
So to your question - are you able to resist the allure of this world? Should you? Does it being virtual or not change whether or not there is meaning in your life?
Though I'm not really interested in being a king of my own universe. I'd much rather be a traveler through the universe of another. And I suspect there's much more interesting universes out there than simply an educational sim of what life was like in the late stages of humanity and the establishment of what came next, so I'm game to explore.
Also, the creation and variety of virtual worlds we are creating and will continue to create is very much part of the narrative of this reality. And so while traveling through this virtual world, I'm certainly keen on exploring its precursors. We've already come a long way from Pong.
At the same time, I'm not a fan of replaying things, so while I am curious and look forward to whatever is the next world in my queue, I think it's important to take time to appreciate the one I'm in at the moment, as I am certainly am never coming back to this shit hole, as beautiful and majestic as its entropy driven 'design' can be in moments.
As with most things, balance is generally a good way to go.

What's happening to the users' bodies and how are things handled financially for this hypothetical scenario?

I think sci-fi has it right with that, I mean you'd only get up out of your chair or whatever receptacle to perform bodily functions. Most people think everyone would turn into fat blobs, but I think that's not the case. There's this one sci-fi where I think they got it right, most people became emaciated due to a failure to eat and get any exercise.
Oh and I'll take the blue pill, VR all the way, reality blows. Though some might say reality is already virtual. It's an interesting hypothesis, sure would explain a lot.

Okay, where do I have to sign?

I wanna live in the project zomboid universe or into the radius VR. There's just something about living in a apocalypse and trying to survive that makes it appealing for me.
- Knowing the food I make my Zomboid PC eat, I definitely wouldn't want to. Time to eat an entire can of sardines and wash it down with some evaporated milk!
  
  Can food and chips all day

Just watch the TV series "Westworld".
(Edit: or one of the many other scifi movies / series / books discussing exactly that question.)

Reminds me of this comic
https://twitter.com/Merryweatherey/status/1185636106257211392

It’s fine, but moderation is key. If you spend all your time (or even your life!) there, then that’s unhealthy. You’re using it as an escape and avoiding the real world.
- But why? What if someone is truly happy in the simulation while in real life they're miserable. I doubt that on their death bed they're wishing they didn't spend more time doing meaningless work and having no friends.

I would rather be interested in trans corporal to the real world. Being just free of the corporal realm and be able to live as a flying 🧠

Read "Infinite" by Jeremy Robinson. It's a Sci-fi novel that explores a bit that idea.

For me it depends on who controls it really, say Amazon becomes the skynet and creates such seamless vr I will never even try it out, resisting isnt too difficult im that case

I'd jump in, but i would still need a crafted experience. I find designing my own sandbox to be a bit dull. Remember the last season of the Good Place? Turns out infinite wish fulfilment might not be that effective at making us happy. And it certainly won't help us to develop.
But if there are fun, designed experiences that are engaging and challenging to do inside this realm, sign me the fuck up.
Question though: how is time experienced on the inside? Because if our virtual experiences happen faster than real time we could get some real world advantages by studying and training in virtual.
- One issue with learning and training, is that you'll have the same limitations as now. You are still human, just connected to a machine and time cannot accelerate to learn faster.
  However if we could move, change time to whatever place we want, create whatever we want. And still look real.
  Then that would maybe make something very interesting for learning and training. It wouldn't be faster. But for example a teacher would be able to create a world where they can help the students learn better, with images, simulations, stories...
  However that may also create some issues where it wouldn't be wise to recreate wars, death and other things which can be shocking for people. Because of that realism, it would be very hard to distinguish between a simulated war/death and a real one.
  Tho it would maybe create a huge benefit for training for flying a plane for example. Cheap and no risks to break anything.

Of course, but I'd still want to contribute to the real world. Luckily my contributions are non physical, so I could work from VR. And I'd have to log out occasionally to exercise.
- Why couldn't you exercise in VR?
  
  Unless the machine you're connected to somehow stimulates your muscles so that they don't athrope then exercise is probably one of the few things you couldn't do in VR. The reason is the same why you can't exercise in your dreams either.
  You can do the activity ofcourse and it feels like working out but it does not translate to physical gains in your real body.

Probably if it's a San Junipero situation.
- Give me the outcome of The Good Place as well where you can choose oblivion after there's nothing left to do.
  San Junipero was one of the few "happy" episodes of Black Mirror but it didn't ask the question of "where are we in 10,000 years?" like The Good Place considered.

I question the ethics of ruling over AI subjects and the premise of "anything goes".
- Me too.
  Who I am doesn't really change based on the perceived humanity of other humanoids. I can't even complete the Dark Brotherhood quests in Skyrim.
  No way am I up for getting all Westworld on an AI.
- This is where we start getting into the realm of philosophy as it relates to science fiction esq "true" Artificial Intelligence.
  Taking the post at face value these AI persons that populate your individual pocket dimension would be, for all intents and purposes, sentient artificial minds, or at least controlled by 1 central mind.
  So does that AI deserve human rights? Do laws apply to the and interaction had with them? If all they know is humanity then are they also "human"? Is this theoretically infinitely intelligent super computer even capable of truly understanding humanity, emotions, life in all of its facets?
  I fully accept that I am getting too deep into this funny internet post but there have been hundreds upon thousands of books, thought experiments, and debates over this EXACT premise. Short answer is there is no answer. It's Schrodinger's morality lol
- That's why I said AI that seems consciouss
  
  What's the difference seeming conscious and being conscious?

I would jump in head first. Anything that will make me run from this reality.

I think there is a flaw in these kinds of arguments and that is the assumption that a perfect simulation would even be desirable. Why not enhance it with abilities like teleportation, third person views, searches and other HUD-like UI elements,...? I can tell from years of using Second Life that those don't ruin immersion nearly as much as VR-proponents seem to think.
- But I did not include such limitations

We could and we should. "Real world" will deteriorate socially, enviromentally and architecturally if real VR becomes popular.
- Not necessarily. We might have robots and AI keeping up the economy and human drudgery is no longer needed.

I think it would be great to try out things that are impossible in the real world without any risks. Not necessarily crazy things, but things that are just not available to me irl. Like designing stuff without any limits of ressources or money. That way we could improve the real world by testing things in the virtual.
It quickly turns into a philosophical question of what you really want to do in the real world and why. It doesn't make much sense to better your real world for things that could be easily done in the virtual. However, since your life even in the virtual world depends on your real survival, there would still be things to do.
Then there's also the thing that your virtual world would be limited to your own imagination. At some point, that will get boring even with virtual people around. It would still make sense to exchange ideas with actual people in order to expand your own virtual world.

Ready Player One Matrix And maybe others but I don't know.
It would be extremely hard to resist. Such tech may be expensive, tho it could still be owned by poorer people once it decreases in cost, as it would allow to escape their poorness.
Tho because mostly companies will do things like that, I mostly see something like in Ready Player One. Where you have a giant social network/game, where you can participate in plenty of different activities which can look like the real world, or not.
The Matrix version where you are in a world filled with "real people"/AI, where you have the same world but have some super powers, well not really sure. Do you really want to have powers, what to do with them?
It's also difficult to get a world like that. Social interactions are pretty much needed for most people. Even if these people don't see it directly, getting out, buying something, it's social interaction. If those AI people aren't good, the experience would most likely be mediocre because of the objective it implies (recreating a similar world but where you can do anything). Tho maybe if it is used as a game, maybe it could interest more people.
However it would enphasis the social distancing of many people and break many things. This is why I'd rather see it as like a social media/game universe.
Another issue in the question now is well, there is no such thing. So it's difficult to even know if it would be interesting or not. Would we be absorbed all day in it like people were in Ready Player One? Will companies try to control us? Make us buy things?
- This seems to be based off the premise that it's not indistinguishable from reality. I think the concept is that the AI are indistinguishable from real people. Is the interaction any less useful than with other people. Plus it says you can visit other "real" people if you want. Personally, I think some ethics come into play in regards to "anything goes" and rulling over AI entities. That's part of my issue with it. If they're indistinguishable from people are they not actually people then?
  
  Can ChatGPT be easily distinguished from a real person (if it doesn't say it's an AI)?
  It is still possible, but not easy (also it is getting worse with time). Tho that doesn't make it a person. However we don't yet have the tech capable of making an entire person just in AI. But if we had it.
  Your concerns may very well be a good point. But these AI humans, may not be considered persons if we suppose current tech enhanced.
  However another moral issue is : let's say there is an AI human in there, and the player falls in love with it. Is the player marrying a person or an AI? From his perspective it could very well be a person. But from another ones perspective it would be an AI. How would other people need to treat such AI? As a person? Not as a person? How awkward would it be?
  Then another one (if everything looks and feels as the real world) : AI humans in there wouldn't be considered as people. Would that mean that you can enslave them? Commit "crimes" (and other considered "bad" things) as they are not considered people? If they look and act like real people is it moral to do such thing?

102 comments