Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A startup is pitching a mind-uploading service that is “100 percent fatal”

technologyreview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 441 posts

Re: A startup is pitching a mind-uploading service that is “100 percent fatal”

#51

Post by savanaly »

PeanutNore wrote: post #42

“Burdening future generations with our brain banks is just comically arrogant. Aren’t we leaving them with enough problems?” Hendricks told me this week after reviewing Nectome’s website. “I hope future people are appalled that in the 21st century, the richest and most comfortable people in history spent their money and resources trying to live forever on the backs of their descendants. I mean, it’s a joke, right? Th…

I don't feel too bad about it. If economic growth stays even slightly positive it won't take too many generations for our descendants to be unimaginably more wealthy than we are. They can put up with our brain banks and dry their tears with their one dollar notes that are worth $1,000 in 2018 dollars.

Re: A startup is pitching a mind-uploading service that is “100 percent fatal”

#52

Post by prepend »

manmal wrote: post #36
prepend wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly, morality and the greater good of humanity requires that we proactively euthanize any genius who hits 60. Even against their will. All assets should go to the euthanasia team to cover costs.

Do you refer to a certain Star Trek episode? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half_a_Life_(Star_Trek:_The_... (Ritual suicide at age 60 embedded in culture)

I had forgotten about this. I bet I subsciously used it.

I was actually thinking of Logan’s Run when writing my comment.

Re: A startup is pitching a mind-uploading service that is “100 percent fatal”

#53

Post by omegaworks »

Michael Hendricks' take is the best:

> “Burdening future generations with our brain banks is just comically arrogant. Aren’t we leaving them with enough problems?” Hendricks told me this week after reviewing Nectome’s website. “I hope future people are appalled that in the 21st century, the richest and most comfortable people in history spent their money and resources trying to live forever on the backs of their descendants. I mean, it’s a joke, right? They are cartoon bad guys.”

We are on the verge of great shifts in climate and energy resources. Millions of humans are already migrating across continents in search of food security and an escape from perpetual war. We're already seeing climate refugees from vulnerable island nations, consumed by the rising seas. Entire governments have been toppled in the Arab Spring, replaced with authoritarian regimes installed to protect the borders of the west.

And a few of the richest people in human history are using their unimaginable resources to try to live forever.

Re: A startup is pitching a mind-uploading service that is “100 percent fatal”

#54

Post by cpeterso »

manmal wrote: post #36
prepend wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly, morality and the greater good of humanity requires that we proactively euthanize any genius who hits 60. Even against their will. All assets should go to the euthanasia team to cover costs.

Do you refer to a certain Star Trek episode? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half_a_Life_(Star_Trek:_The_... (Ritual suicide at age 60 embedded in culture)

Or Logan's Run.

(Ritual suicide embedded in culture, age 21 in the novel and 30 in the film)

Re: A startup is pitching a mind-uploading service that is “100 percent fatal”

#55

Post by ajuc »

sarabande wrote: post #6

In the case when you die, but your brain still exists, and it starts processing it again in a new host (computer or organic), isn't that not you anymore? Why would my former self want that? Is this a solved philosophical problem for which literature exists?

Is it still you when you wake up every day?

What about after general anesthesia?

You only know you are you because of your memories. The future brain will have the memories, so it will think it's you, just like you think today that you are the same you that were awake 3 days ago and 10 years ago.

Are you afraid of nonexistence when you fall asleep, and envy the tommorow's you that he will live in your body and get to see what the future brings?

I don't think there's much difference between these scenarios - the conciousness is interrupted in both cases.

Re: A startup is pitching a mind-uploading service that is “100 percent fatal”

#56

Post by tlb »

prepend wrote: post #48
tlb wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What probability of restoration would be high enough to consider it? The future timelines in which restoration does happen are probably extremely interesting to be part of, given how far tech would have progressed. (There are lots of sucky future timelines too, say with nuclear holocausts, where you'd be unlikely to be restored.) No: 100% chance of death. Yes: 100-X% chance of death, X% chance of getting to see a sup…

Assuming there is a cost, the trade off is reduced money to your heirs or charity. So while it is non-zero, that doesn’t mean it’s worth the cost. That’s why I brought up backups. Remember Zip drives for backup? Imagine if there was no reader at time of launch. And how likely it was to build the reader without any changes to spec that the existing Zip disk could be used to restore without any problems. Even with read…

Would you pay 5% of your net worth for a 10% chance of recovery?

Re: A startup is pitching a mind-uploading service that is “100 percent fatal”

#57

Post by tvanantwerp »

sarabande wrote: post #6

In the case when you die, but your brain still exists, and it starts processing it again in a new host (computer or organic), isn't that not you anymore? Why would my former self want that? Is this a solved philosophical problem for which literature exists?

Depends whether you define yourself as your molecules, or the particular patterns those molecules have taken.

Re: A startup is pitching a mind-uploading service that is “100 percent fatal”

#58

Post by kingbirdy »

savanaly wrote: post #51
PeanutNore wrote: post #42

“Burdening future generations with our brain banks is just comically arrogant. Aren’t we leaving them with enough problems?” Hendricks told me this week after reviewing Nectome’s website. “I hope future people are appalled that in the 21st century, the richest and most comfortable people in history spent their money and resources trying to live forever on the backs of their descendants. I mean, it’s a joke, right? Th…

I don't feel too bad about it. If economic growth stays even slightly positive it won't take too many generations for our descendants to be unimaginably more wealthy than we are. They can put up with our brain banks and dry their tears with their one dollar notes that are worth $1,000 in 2018 dollars.

That's not how inflation works - in the future, the value of the dollar will be less, not more.

Re: A startup is pitching a mind-uploading service that is “100 percent fatal”

#59

Post by acrefoot »

sarabande wrote: post #6

In the case when you die, but your brain still exists, and it starts processing it again in a new host (computer or organic), isn't that not you anymore? Why would my former self want that? Is this a solved philosophical problem for which literature exists?

There are a couple of scenarios that might be helpful to consider, as they are examples of mental discontinuity in use today. I cannot convince you of the semantics of "not you" vs "still you", because I think this question is too ambiguous to address satisfactorily.

- general anesthesia is definitely, to some extent a discontinuity of consciousness. You lose time.

- more extremely, Deep hypothermic circulatory arrest actually (temporarily) causes brain death by cooling the body to between 10˚C and 20˚C. All brain activity ceases for the duration of this deep hypothermia.

Are there risks to these practices? Definitely. Some may argue that someone who undergoes general anesthesia isn't the same person. But I would argue that it is, despite the discontinuity, and despite some risk of personality changes.

Re: A startup is pitching a mind-uploading service that is “100 percent fatal”

#60

Post by grkvlt »

kerkeslager wrote: post #46
sarabande wrote: post #6

In the case when you die, but your brain still exists, and it starts processing it again in a new host (computer or organic), isn't that not you anymore? Why would my former self want that? Is this a solved philosophical problem for which literature exists?

> In the case when you die, but your brain still exists, and it starts processing it again in a new host (computer or organic), isn't that not you anymore? I've yet to come across any evidence of a "self" that exists outside a brain. > Is this a solved philosophical problem for which literature exists? It's a problem that was hypothesized (and not solved) by philosophy, but as far as I know there's no evidence the pr…

> invisible monsters are breeding all around us [...] before they wipe out the human race

See also, the germ theory of disease.[0] I think we have this covered already...

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germ_theory_of_disease

Post reply on HN