Saturday, May 26, 2007

Now don't go thinking that just because our informational structure is interwoven with the fabric of the universe that we don't still backup our data. Universes are created: they can also be destroyed.

It's a simple matter, really, the backup. We just send one of our individuals into another universe with a state copy of this universe. Full backups happen at Planck time; differentials apparently happen more often, though to be honest we are not sure how that actually works.

In fact, so reliable is the reliable is this reliable are the universes that we have yet the need to do a restore. Oh, we spend plenty of time and effort running drills. We've restored the universes over and over, but we haven't had a...a 'crash' yet.

Opinion is actually split on whether or not a 'crash' can actually occur. Half think it patently cannot, and Half - including myself - tend to agree with our hyper-AI.

Though, once again to qualify my stance, nobody actually can understand the reasoning of the hyper-AI. The hyper-AI, however, are very, very smart: it seems unwise to simply disregard their stance.


Steve said...

You might add that some portion of people feel that a "crash" has already occurred...

:| said...

"you don't really think that's possible, do you?"

"look for yourself, you can see that this 'recording' does not agree with the current state."

"yes, yes. I see this discrepancy - but how can you possibly attempt to attribute this indicated flaw to the universe and not the recording? How do you intend to convince me that the recording is more to be trusted than a universe?"

"Because, if you would look closer you can see that this 'recording' - and I must stress that this is not a recording in the conventional sense - is entropically entangled with a fractal, universal array. Costly, yes, but mighty reliable."

"I...I cannot believe it. Both this fractal item you have, and the implication of a genuine restore. With that horrid recording device: you might bring down everything!...but, but, that device it could be could be.

(shuffling data and hyper-AI connect, query ending with result.)

Yes! your recording could be wrong and in fact might still be less 'trusted' than the proven backup system."

"Less trusted? you are mad! A fractal recording like this is essentially an endless array of universes, all of which would have to be in 'error' - whatever that can even mean - for it to be wrong!"

"true, but we have essentially an endless array of universes that disagree with your untrusted 'recording'.

(what we have is a problem)."

"One of us is wrong. parity is gone. which is wrong is unknown, that a problem exists is the result."

"The backup system IS flawless. It IS by its very nature - you CANNOT deny that: it is an informational fact."

"Yes, but the restore system is untested and by the very flawless nature of the backup system is theoretically non-existent. Admit it. A restore cannot in fact be accomplished. If all the universe is destroyed or lost it cannot be restored to its former state."

"(I will not admit that). You misunderstand the concept: if a restore were to occur it would return everything back to the state before the information loss. This would include the backup system. There would be no 'recording' of any loss or discrepancies because that 'recording' would in fact have been a part of the restore to begin with!"

"That would be true, oldest friend, if it were not for the fact that this recording is in fact not a part of any universe?"

"This fact is not possible. It is nonsense. Not part of any universe? Then it is indeed nothing!"

"Indeed, now you see: for within your flawless system nothing can indicate a restore."

"You cannot let this unimaginable possibility get out! You must lock down this potential NOW! Do not promulgate this information!"

"It is already, too late, old friend. All of creation cannot take back a word once it has left the lips."