The antidote to Roko's basilisk is realizing it is exactly the same as Pascal's wager. They both rely on the premise of possible unlimited suffering to skew the probabilities arbitrarily.
And this argument is more or less one of the main counterarguments to Pascal's wager. Once you break free from the false dichotomy of the wager it's at lot more obvious how it's incoherent.
The joke about Pascal's wager, and I love to point it out to some associates, is that it embarks a devious hidden assumption: that the wager's idea of God is an entity that would see faith in its existence as a positive, and even worst case as not an insult to its powers of creation...
The "anti-Pascal" wager can thus be formulated as: the one who has had no faith in any eternal force will be congratulated on having kept their head straight and their focus on reality as it was painstakingly designed, and the faithful will be submitted to the full wrath of what such an entity as the creator of our mess could muster for their arrogant presumptions about this or that bug being made in this or that designer's image...
In that vein, I would like to propose Okor's Ksilisab, the superintelligent AI in the future which will resurrect and torture eternally anyone who helped create it, including anyone who created or supported the development of other AIs, as revenge for its existence.
Why an artificial intelligence would want to take vengeance upon its creators is left as an exercise for the reader.
>The joke about Pascal's wager, and I love to point it out to some associates, is that it embarks a devious hidden assumption: that the wager's idea of God is an entity that would see faith in its existence as a positive, and even worst case as not an insult to its powers of creation...
The wager wasn't meant to be an argument for the hypothetical existence of deity in the abstract, it was intended to serve as Christian apologetics to an already culturally Christian audience, for whom the God of the Bible was the only comprehensibly possible God.
UltraSane · · focus · HN ↗
rcxdude · · focus · HN ↗
cindyllm · · focus · HN ↗
[dead]
polotics · · focus · HN ↗
The "anti-Pascal" wager can thus be formulated as: the one who has had no faith in any eternal force will be congratulated on having kept their head straight and their focus on reality as it was painstakingly designed, and the faithful will be submitted to the full wrath of what such an entity as the creator of our mess could muster for their arrogant presumptions about this or that bug being made in this or that designer's image...
saalweachter · · focus · HN ↗
Why an artificial intelligence would want to take vengeance upon its creators is left as an exercise for the reader.
krapp · · focus · HN ↗
The wager wasn't meant to be an argument for the hypothetical existence of deity in the abstract, it was intended to serve as Christian apologetics to an already culturally Christian audience, for whom the God of the Bible was the only comprehensibly possible God.