It's inane to claim existence being the root of all evil, because, yeah, it's the root of friggin' _everything_.
Nothing is forced on "you" because without existence there is no "you". Or anti-natalists could just as easily be blamed of "depriving" the non-born of their chance to live. Ouch.
I, for one, enjoy life (and don't you dare tell me I just don't realise it sucks). I even like working on the hard bits, like underpaid shopkeepers and inhumane working hours, thank you.
I am not clear why the proof is so long. By induction, the first i elements are already smaller than the A[i], so it's essentially an unoptimised version of
> Would it be possible to develop a computer from linear transformations?
Yes. The transition function of Turing machines and the working tape can be represented as linear transformations. For quantum computers, these transformations even need to be unitary.
This very standard construction does not conflict with the halting problem: you don't know how often you have to apply this linear transform to your state vector until you got your result.
Since there is no technical definition (not to speak of a measure of degree) of consciousness, we could assume that it is very likely, statistically. All life forms have undergone the same amount of evolution, after all.
And even if we are wrong, this assumption would do this world great good.
If infection rates were double digit, the "think of what we could save" argument might perhaps deserve some consideration. But as it stands, I feel the only warranted concern is the well-being of Covid survivors.
But to be fair, the components you use could be "spiked". Imagine resistors, capacitors, transistors that can find out when they are used in a particular configuration and change their parameters accordingly. /s
I wish you the best of luck reasoning about life and happiness in Java. Just don't attribute the ensuing frustrations to being born.