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

A man who ran out of air at the bottom of the ocean

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 180 posts

Re: A man who ran out of air at the bottom of the ocean

#151

Post by garmaine »

bduerst wrote: post #149
garmaine wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would that work? Future technology, no matter how advanced, would still require the information in your brain to simulate you. The point of cronics is to preserve that information.

Just simulate the entire universe and pluck the brain structure of the person you're trying to bring back into reality. You're missing the point though. These solutions entirely rely on future technology development being the omnipotence that gives you afterlife.

You’re assuming magic.

Re: A man who ran out of air at the bottom of the ocean

#152

Post by dragonwriter »

nwatson wrote: post #137
TeMPOraL wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't. You can only hope that a) future people won't revive you unless they're somewhat confident it'll leave you better off than you were when frozen, and b) worst comes to worst, they can still euthanize you. Cryonics is ultimately a bet on future technology and future humanity .

Future people will use the frozen as a resource. I would buy a 2139-October call option on 100-frozen-hopefuls ... that's when I estimate techniques for revival will be viable and when legal hurdles to mass exploitation will be overcome. In 120 years nobody will care about your intentions in being frozen.

> I would buy a 2139-October call option on 100-frozen-hopefuls.

Unless you live inordinately long, you'll only be in a position to benefit from that if you are wrong about it being a worthwhile investment. (But right about the technological enablers—just wrong on the socio/legal issues.)

Re: A man who ran out of air at the bottom of the ocean

#153

Post by mrhappyunhappy »

ultrarunner wrote: post #55
mrhappyunhappy wrote: post #50

Great, an ad for a documentary. Fascinating story but still an ad.

I got rid of my TV entirely in large part because of the ads. I run an ad blocker. I’m not a fan of most advertising. But man, when something is actually useful and unobtrusive I don’t complain! Imagine if every ad was a captivating story that made you think and introduced interesting concepts (like death being less something to fear and more about what you leave behind). That’s not going to happen, so even if this i…

Fair point. Sometimes I just have angry moments when I realize I’m being sold to. I don’t stop to think that maybe perhaps it’s okay to do this if you are sharing something interesting.

Re: A man who ran out of air at the bottom of the ocean

#154

Post by [deleted] »

mc32 wrote: post #19
hprotagonist wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what is the sea floor if not the bottom of the ocean?

Well, in a way yes, but then so is wading next to the seashore. Think of the converse “at the top of the mountain.” At least I’m thinking some peak and not just on a slope up the mountain.

[deleted]

Re: A man who ran out of air at the bottom of the ocean

#155

Post by idlewords »

cheerlessbog wrote: post #139
Swifty wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not entirely true, not all agencies teach a Controlled Emergency Swimming Ascent (CESA). From memory the only one that teaches this is PADI. Most don't as this is not a very effective or safe way of getting up once you get bellow a few M of water. Most agency's will teach you to do an Alternate Source assent where you come up breathing of your buddy's air source, as this allows you to come up at a safer and m…

As I remember the PADI training the CESA is the absolute last resort when your buddy is not available. I imagine all authorities would agree that it's less bad than remaining at depth without gas.

No novice diver is going to remain at depth in an out-of-air situation, under any circumstances. The point of training the CESA is to teach people not to hold their breath and hurt themselves when they panic and bolt for the surface. This panic reflex is so strong that it takes dozens of hours of training and practice to be able to signal a buddy and breathe off their air supply in a real emergency situation.

You can see this reality reflected in the rescue diver certification (a fairly advanced level of training), which revolves around how to stop people bolting for the surface when they have trouble getting air. Rescue divers are taught some fairly extreme measures—you pull the person's regulator, yank their fins off, pull off their mask, and hold them down by the tank valve, anything you can do to prevent them surfacing at high speed. Better a briefly unconscious diver than one with an air embolism.

Re: A man who ran out of air at the bottom of the ocean

#156

Post by jerf »

bduerst wrote: post #149
garmaine wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would that work? Future technology, no matter how advanced, would still require the information in your brain to simulate you. The point of cronics is to preserve that information.

Just simulate the entire universe and pluck the brain structure of the person you're trying to bring back into reality. You're missing the point though. These solutions entirely rely on future technology development being the omnipotence that gives you afterlife.

That seems more to be an assumption you're bringing in, rather than others. There's a huge gulf between "technology that can read the structure of the brain and recreate it" (which seems to be something merely lacking in know-how and tech, but with no fundamentally-impossible steps), and "simulate the entire universe as-is, in situ, and assume it's 100% accurate, and pluck people out of it" (a la https://qntm.org/responsibility), which seems outright impossible as no system can simulate itself fully. I'm honestly having trouble wrapping my head around how you're both managing to insist on the latter being the only possibility while simultaneously telling people that it's a bad assumption.

Re: A man who ran out of air at the bottom of the ocean

#157

Post by jfk13 »

garmaine wrote: post #146
bduerst wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's my point, why even bother freezing the brain, if simply waiting a few centuries more of tech progress will mean you don't even need the brain to be consciously brought back? It's just replacing the faith in one omnipotent's afterlife with another.

How would that work? Future technology, no matter how advanced, would still require the information in your brain to simulate you. The point of cronics is to preserve that information.

But currently we don't know what "information in your brain" would be required, so it's a huge leap of faith to suppose that cryonics is successfully preserving it.

(That's supposing "information in your brain" would even be sufficient by itself. Another leap of faith.)

Re: A man who ran out of air at the bottom of the ocean

#158

Post by ultrarunner »

mrhappyunhappy wrote: post #153
ultrarunner wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got rid of my TV entirely in large part because of the ads. I run an ad blocker. I’m not a fan of most advertising. But man, when something is actually useful and unobtrusive I don’t complain! Imagine if every ad was a captivating story that made you think and introduced interesting concepts (like death being less something to fear and more about what you leave behind). That’s not going to happen, so even if this i…

Fair point. Sometimes I just have angry moments when I realize I’m being sold to. I don’t stop to think that maybe perhaps it’s okay to do this if you are sharing something interesting.

I completely agree! So much of the advertising industry seems to be comprised of people who have an enormous amount of distain for their target demographics. People don't like being taken advantage of or manipulated, and it's depressing that it's gotten to this point.

I just think that in this case, while they (ostensibly) want to promote a documentary, they're presenting it in an honestly compelling way. That's about as much as I could ask for, I think, and I wish others would reimagine how they sell products to align more with this strategy.

Re: A man who ran out of air at the bottom of the ocean

#159

Post by bduerst »

garmaine wrote: post #151
bduerst wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just simulate the entire universe and pluck the brain structure of the person you're trying to bring back into reality. You're missing the point though. These solutions entirely rely on future technology development being the omnipotence that gives you afterlife.

You’re assuming magic.

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

Re: A man who ran out of air at the bottom of the ocean

#160

Post by bduerst »

jerf wrote: post #156
bduerst wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just simulate the entire universe and pluck the brain structure of the person you're trying to bring back into reality. You're missing the point though. These solutions entirely rely on future technology development being the omnipotence that gives you afterlife.

That seems more to be an assumption you're bringing in, rather than others. There's a huge gulf between "technology that can read the structure of the brain and recreate it" (which seems to be something merely lacking in know-how and tech, but with no fundamentally-impossible steps), and "simulate the entire universe as-is, in situ, and assume it's 100% accurate, and pluck people out of it" (a la https://qntm.org/res…

That's the point. Whether it's reviving frozen brains or resimulating consciousness, it's an entirely faith-based argument in technological progress.
Post reply on HN