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

391–400 of 441 posts

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

#391

Post by kerkeslager »

projektir wrote: post #344
kerkeslager wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

This is really NOT the topic that most people are OK handwaving away simply because the evidence isn't there, because this topic is older than the concept of science itself and it's the #1 thing that gives anything around here any meaning whatsoever. Inventing the scientific method doesn't mean you get a carte blanche to call invalid everything you haven't gotten around to understanding with it. This is not a solved…

> This is really NOT the topic that most people are OK handwaving away simply because the evidence isn't there

Whether people are okay with an idea has very little relation to whether it's true.

> this topic is older than the concept of science itself

On the contrary, what makes science important is that it doesn't just exist in the imaginations of humans, it exists in reality. Incidentally, reality predates humans.

> it's the #1 thing that gives anything around here any meaning whatsoever.

I derive meaning in my life from curiosity, from beauty, from relationships with other people, from fun. Incidentally, all of these things clearly exist, and aren't so fragile that I feel threatened if someone on the internet says they don't exist.

Just because you have chosen to base the meaning of your life on a belief in self existing outside the brain doesn't mean anyone else is obligated to pretend that exists.

I'd argue that the underlying reasons you think the idea of a human self outside the human brain is meaningful is that you associate it with community (religion) anyway. Beliefs aren't necessary to have that.

> This is not a solved problem and if someone gets this tech it's going to become an issue.

I didn't say it was a solved problem; I said it's a nonexistent problem.

> A political issue, not a scientific one, because this one is in the region of politics, science doesn't know what's going on here.

The facts of whether a human self exists outside of the human brain is totally within the region of science.

Whether we as a society try to force your beliefs on people is within the region of politics. I would like to see some evidence that the problem exists before we start making laws to solve it.

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

#392

Post by beojan »

dorgo wrote: post #372
weerd wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is intense. I hope that's the only time you have to experience that. Speaking of hell, it's actually similar to what my Catholic school taught us hell would be like. No physical pain or brimstone... Just your mind, alone and separated from all for eternity.

Really? Interesting. People are social to an extent that they think isolation is hell?

Yes, that's why solitary confinement is considered torture.

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

#393

Post by ericb »

ajuc wrote: post #382
ericb wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, I have a clone of you in the other room and a gun. I am going to kill either you or them. You pick. Who do you pick? Why? My suspicion is that most people suddenly realize they prefer the instance of their consciousness they are inhabiting.

If you merge our memories afterwards it doesn't matter who you kill. Otherways it's a murder.

There's no merge. The question is not whether it is a crime, that's irrelevant.

The question is, which one you prefer I terminate. You, the one I'm talking to, or the other person in the other room. The preference most people have is "the other one" which pretty much lays bare that these two instances are not, in fact, equivalent because they are "in" one of these consciousnesses, and not the other.

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

#394

Post by dfee »

incompatible wrote: post #377
dfee wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did not know this. I assumed certain technology is more advanced in private industry or classified governmental programs, but I was unaware that my iPhone X is effectively a 1997 device.

You can find research projects that haven't (yet) been commercialised. They exist only in prototype form that either isn't ready for mass production or isn't economically feasible. You see it all the time with things like memristors or the latest potential cure for cancer.

Sure, but integration of technologies is a technology itself. And, that too must then be 20 years old.

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

#395

Post by devgutt »

chronolitus wrote: post #383
devgutt wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe memory is overrated in the great scheme of things.

sure, remove memory. and decision making, that's biochemical too. And personality? probably. Remove some impulses and reflexes and primordial pathways. Now that 's the real you! What's left, though?

My comment was related to the OP comment. When you were born, you didn't have any reminiscent memory, because memory is intrinsically related to your physical brain. If you damage your brain, you could lose memory or change completely what you call "self". If you are a Christian and believe in after-life, a good way to reconcile this is downplaying the importance of memory itself (overrated). But this is related the OP's point of view (Christians believe in after-life). I, personally, don't believe in after-life, so everything you are is in your brain and memory is crucial.

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

#396

Post by projektir »

kerkeslager wrote: post #391
projektir wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is really NOT the topic that most people are OK handwaving away simply because the evidence isn't there, because this topic is older than the concept of science itself and it's the #1 thing that gives anything around here any meaning whatsoever. Inventing the scientific method doesn't mean you get a carte blanche to call invalid everything you haven't gotten around to understanding with it. This is not a solved…

> This is really NOT the topic that most people are OK handwaving away simply because the evidence isn't there Whether people are okay with an idea has very little relation to whether it's true. > this topic is older than the concept of science itself On the contrary, what makes science important is that it doesn't just exist in the imaginations of humans, it exists in reality. Incidentally, reality predates humans.…

> Whether people are okay with an idea has very little relation to whether it's true.

It has a relation to what degree of evidence people will find satisfactory. Science alone is not sufficient for most people to carry on their lives, and this is one of those topics. This is not an argument for it being true or false, it's an argument against waving it away as a problem on the basis of "well we don't have any proof of it". Of course you don't have any proof of it.

There's no solid proof that solipsism isn't true, either, but that doesn't mean I am going to start believing people around me aren't real and don't feel, just because there's no evidence. Science also doesn't have any concrete evidence that being a dick is not a good idea, should I drop that, too?

> I derive meaning in my life from curiosity, from beauty, from relationships with other people, from fun. Incidentally, all of these things clearly exist, and aren't so fragile that I feel threatened if someone on the internet says they don't exist.

None of these exist if there's no "you" to speak of. Who's curious? If you die every time you go to sleep, curiosity doesn't strike me as a very meaningful concept. That's what I mean by meaning. Basically all the things you list here rely on a stable concept of "you".

> The facts of whether a human self exists outside of the human brain is totally within the region of science.

I am not talking about a "human self", there's nothing human about it since it's not tied to a specific body or a body at all in the first place. Sometimes I wonder if the problem is that people are still talking about the old concept of "soul", complete with consciousness and memories. I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about an address.

> Whether we as a society try to force your beliefs on people is within the region of politics. I would like to see some evidence that the problem exists before we start making laws to solve it.

People using devices that upload their minds or break continuity is absolutely going to get political I guarantee it, and I can completely imagine people being forced and coerced to use such devices because it's convenient to someone else and because "well the evidence doesn't say there's a problem". Because if you go with that belief, you're not doing anything bad, and the person thinking you're murdering them is just ignorant in your eyes.

Hopefully we'll have a more flexible reasoning system by then that didn't completely throw philosophy in the dumpster because we're too smart for it.

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

#397

Post by ajuc »

ericb wrote: post #393
ajuc wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you merge our memories afterwards it doesn't matter who you kill. Otherways it's a murder.

There's no merge. The question is not whether it is a crime, that's irrelevant. The question is, which one you prefer I terminate. You, the one I'm talking to, or the other person in the other room. The preference most people have is "the other one" which pretty much lays bare that these two instances are not, in fact, equivalent because they are "in" one of these consciousnesses, and not the other.

If there's no merge, then these 2 copies diverged and are not the same, so I prefer me. If there was a merge then there should be no difference.

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

#398

Post by projektir »

ajuc wrote: post #386
projektir wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure, are you comfortable living one day only, and leaving all the problems to be for future you to take care of? Because for that logic, you basically don't exist that much at all, and the moment you go to sleep, the rest of your life is somebody else's problem, because you effectively die. That is what you're saying (and that is what people like us would expect from mind upload). So you tell me why it's a p…

> all my problems are still my own. Or you can decide the leave everything and become a monk. I don't see how that's an argument one way or another. > There's only one of "me" to go around. Why? It seems to be the crux of your argument, but you don't justify it in any way.

> Or you can decide the leave everything and become a monk. I don't see how that's an argument one way or another.

You seem to have missed what I said.

I mean that, if I don't wash the dishes today, and I go to sleep, it's still me who's going to have to wash those dishes tomorrow. It's not someone else. It's me. That "me" is the question. I can't just not wake up as "me" tomorrow. If continuity wasn't a thing then the concept of "me" shouldn't exist at all, so there would be no responsible party in the first place, but every morning I find that I need to wake up, go to work, and then sometimes wash the dishes.

Of course, the entire experience of "me" can be falsified by a 3rd party, sure, but the world itself could also be falsified, neither of these beliefs are particularly actionable. But "the person who didn't wash the dishes and the person who then suffers the consequences is a continual entity" is actionable, it means I should wash my dishes.

> Why? It seems to be the crux of your argument, but you don't justify it in any way.

Because I can't wake up and control two people at the same time. That doesn't even happen in the case of multiple personality disorder.

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

#399

Post by rjbwork »

daodedickinson wrote: post #349
weerd wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a main element of DeLillo's latest book Zero K . A state-of-the-art secret facility is built in a middle of nowhere former Soviet bloc country. It's financed by ultra wealthy people whose bodies are disassembled and frozen with the hopes they will be reanimated in the future. There is a short chapter that is narrated by the detached consciousness of one of the patrons. She has lost all sense of self and is tr…

I had something similar happen to me once and didn't know how long it was going to last and it really was that terrifying, except instead of questioning what I was, I could remember everything I normally could. I just couldn't sense anything but my own thoughts and memories. Luckily I came out of it, but it would be an awful hell.

This happened to me once in high school. I had fallen asleep on the couch in the basement (it was fully finished, and my siblings and I spent most of our days down there when we weren't outside, playing, watching TV, and playing video games) in the early evening. When my sister wanted to watch TV, she tried to wake me up, leaning over the back of the couch. For a solid 5 minutes my memory just did not work at all. My inner monologue was something like "What? What is all of this? What am I? What is that (my sister)? Where am i?" etc, repeatedly for a number of minutes.

Nothing like it has happened since.

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

#400

Post by benji-york »

simplify wrote: post #140
noetic_techy wrote: post #107

This is going to sound a bit out there, but what if your brain is simply an antenna for your consciousness to come through from wherever. Has anyone actually tried to boot up an artificial brain derived from a real organism? I'd like to see a proof of concept that your brain IS indeed the seat of your consciousness, and not just a fancy quantum antenna.

Even as a Christian, I think the idea of a human being more than the dust they're made of is only wishful thinking. If consciousness is not sourced from the brain, then why is memory so dependent on the brain?

As a Christian, I tend to agree. I suspect the "soul" is simply the mathematical description of a particular consciousness (or class of consciousnesses).
Post reply on HN