Nick Bostrom wrote:
> Reasoning under computational limitations is a very underdeveloped
> field. In any case I don't think much of that would be applicable
> here. What is relevant is rather the literature about the Doomsday
> argument and the anthropic principle (which you of course already
> know a lot about). Check out my web site at
Hmmm. Wouldn't this be more correctly phrased as a prediction about the number of gaussian humans that will exist in the future? The number of posthumans currently living appears to be 0, which means you'd need an entirely different chain of reasoning to predict *their* likelihood of survival.
Billy Brown, MCSE+I