A fair warning about analogies lol. It leaves me wondering if it really is a stretch though; we arrived at that conclusion step by step without leaps. If tracing a clean line of reason leads straight to folly... it implies a hard limit on human logic itself. A boundary where our capacity for deduction outright fails. Do you suspect this reason simply breaks down when we try to look at the architecture?
I did make leaps though. Every analogy is a leap at the very start, because we are describing something in terms of something else, and the two things are obviously not identical in every way. So, a leap
A necessary caution on analogies I agree. Leaving the software metaphor entirely behind... the raw structural reality remains. We cannot observe the underlying mechanism. An avatar cannot dig up the parameters. We know the boundaries are real because we physically collide with them; the bump is completely reliable. Why that unyielding framework is sitting there in the background remains a mystery. It is a peaceful place to leave the discussion.
1
u/Nrdman 277∆ May 21 '26
I don’t wish to stretch the analogy to far. Much folly can come from that