Scott explores the implications of Sean Carroll's argument against the simulation hypothesis, suggesting that our inability to explain consciousness might indicate we're in a 'ground-level' simulation.
Longer summary
Scott Alexander discusses Sean Carroll's argument against the simulation hypothesis, exploring the implications if Carroll's reasoning is correct. He posits that a 'ground-level' universe, incapable of simulating other universes, would have to be strange, potentially banning Turing machines while still allowing for conscious observers. Scott then considers a version of anthropics conditioned on consciousness, suggesting that in a ground-level simulation, consciousness would remain inexplicable to its inhabitants despite their ability to understand all other aspects of their universe. He concludes that if Carroll's deconstruction is correct, our difficulty in explaining consciousness might indicate we're in a ground-level simulation.
Shorter summary