I'm surprised how easily people equate "duplication of the mind" with "immortality". I'm agnostic when it comes to god, and I'm agnostic about that piece of the singularity. Maybe someday we'll have enough knowledge of the mind and reality to know for sure that "the self" really is just a bunch of organic bits in the ol' noggin, but anyone claiming to know that answer right now is too presumptuous.
Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004
61–70 of 78 posts
Re: Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004
#62At the bottom update, he proposes that standard procedure should be to cryogenically freeze unknown corpses. I as a taxpayer do not want to shoulder this burden. As time goes on, the expense of keeping unknown corpses frozen continually increases as they pile up.
The per capita expense of keeping a thousand frozen heads in a pool of liquid nitrogen is essentially negligible. You wouldn't notice it as a budget item. If it really bugs you, fund it yourself through private philanthropy. But out of all the things that government was ever proposed to do, this would be the most cost-effective in the history of time - even I, a libertarian, draw the line at not doing this . Cryonics…
It depends how far away our ability to reanimate them is. I don't know how many thousands or tens of thousands of unidentified people (or ones otherwise taken care of by the state) die every year. In a stable population the per capita cost of keeping them all would keep increasing.
Moreover, what would we do with them? Copy their consciousness into a computer some day? Who pays for that? And does it really soften the blow of losing a loved one? I don't think having a copy of my dead mother would make me feel any better about the real one having passed on.
Would we grow them new bodies? What does that cost and who pays for that? Would they even want that? Do we have the right to make that decision for them? If we reanimate everyone who dies, how quickly can our country no longer sustain such a rapidly increasing population?
All of this just seems like an illogical reaction to the death of a loved one. I don't mean that to be rude (I've had my own illogical reactions) but it's just not feasible, especially for a technology that we're not sure will ever amount to anything.
Re: Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
The per capita expense of keeping a thousand frozen heads in a pool of liquid nitrogen is essentially negligible. You wouldn't notice it as a budget item. If it really bugs you, fund it yourself through private philanthropy. But out of all the things that government was ever proposed to do, this would be the most cost-effective in the history of time - even I, a libertarian, draw the line at not doing this . Cryonics…
It depends how far away our ability to reanimate them is. I don't know how many thousands or tens of thousands of unidentified people (or ones otherwise taken care of by the state) die every year. In a stable population the per capita cost of keeping them all would keep increasing. Moreover, what would we do with them? Copy their consciousness into a computer some day? Who pays for that? And does it really soften the…
We're operating on different technological assumptions here. Cryonics reanimation takes nanotech and quite possibly machine superintelligence, both of which are self-replicating technologies. The software might be expensive, as 'twere, but that's a one-time cost.
Regarding the thing with "copies", that's a complex issue and I can only refer you to the entire sequence on personal identity on Overcoming Bias:
Re: Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004
#64This doesn't do anything to dissuade me of the notion that the singularity movement is a religious movement. The comfort of hope in an afterlife and hope in scientific immortality seem quite similar. While research into singularity and anti-aging could be better funded, I'm not sure why we need to 'believe' in these things or make sure we join the correct denominations (transhumanist vs non-transhumanist). Besides, u…
This doesn't do anything to dissuade me of the notion that the space race is a religious movement. The comfort of hope in ascending to Heaven and hope in engineering feats seem quite similar. While research into aeronautics and rocket motors could be better funded, I'm not sure why we need to 'believe' in these things or make sure we join the correct aerospace company. Besides, unless the universe is infinite we're j…
I'm not sure what point you think this makes. That comment would be an appropriate response to someone writing an article about how space travel will free us from the fear of death and how we can only really have hope if we are spacehumanists.
Re: Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
It depends how far away our ability to reanimate them is. I don't know how many thousands or tens of thousands of unidentified people (or ones otherwise taken care of by the state) die every year. In a stable population the per capita cost of keeping them all would keep increasing. Moreover, what would we do with them? Copy their consciousness into a computer some day? Who pays for that? And does it really soften the…
We're operating on different technological assumptions here. Cryonics reanimation takes nanotech and quite possibly machine superintelligence, both of which are self-replicating technologies. The software might be expensive, as 'twere, but that's a one-time cost. Regarding the thing with "copies", that's a complex issue and I can only refer you to the entire sequence on personal identity on Overcoming Bias: http://ww…
If you had to make an educated guess, how long would it be until we can reanimate cryogenically frozen people? And what would the cost of freezing everyone who passes away until then be?
Re: Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004
#66At the bottom update, he proposes that standard procedure should be to cryogenically freeze unknown corpses. I as a taxpayer do not want to shoulder this burden. As time goes on, the expense of keeping unknown corpses frozen continually increases as they pile up.
The per capita expense of keeping a thousand frozen heads in a pool of liquid nitrogen is essentially negligible. You wouldn't notice it as a budget item. If it really bugs you, fund it yourself through private philanthropy. But out of all the things that government was ever proposed to do, this would be the most cost-effective in the history of time - even I, a libertarian, draw the line at not doing this . Cryonics…
Umm, and remember there's no convincing reason to believe cryogenics work. Sure, we've cooled down some animals and brought them back. But keeping a head near absolute zero for years, and expecting to revive a consciousness? No evidence for it. None.
Re: Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your comment was similar to one I was going to make... It's interesting to see that man still seeks that feeling of meaning (in life) and hope (after death) even when they do not believe in a God/afterlife. How does one find value in life when - in the long run - their entire existence will be forgotten and their species just a blip on the timeline of Evolution? If you think about it, on the infinite (or even extreme…
3) The possibility that after fulfilling the manifest destiny of implacably rampaging across our universe our descendants will eventually tease apart the fundamental mathematical equations describing the foundations of our existence and find our universe not alone with nothing but the greek chaos surrounding it but amid a vast collection of universes for our future generations to spread to and conquer. Goals of Man ☑…
Nice unicode checkboxes. But dude, what are we running from?
Re: Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I similarly don't get the fascination with brain simulation. Say someone told me they had an exact simulation of by brain running, and I was convinced beyond a doubt they were right, would I be fine with dying at that point? No. To paraphrase Samuel Clemens: "I don't want to gain immortality through brain simulation. I want to gain immortality by not dying."
It was Allan Konigsberg, not Samuel Clemens.
Yep, that's right. Bad on me for not sourcing my quote.
Re: Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I similarly don't get the fascination with brain simulation. Say someone told me they had an exact simulation of by brain running, and I was convinced beyond a doubt they were right, would I be fine with dying at that point? No. To paraphrase Samuel Clemens: "I don't want to gain immortality through brain simulation. I want to gain immortality by not dying."
And what if somebody was slowly replacing your real neurons with artificial ones? Start with one chip-neuron, finish with the whole artificial brain. In all steps of the process your "self" being preserved. Credit goes to Stanislaw Lem "Do you exist Mr Jones?"
Yeah, that's a bit more convincing. I'm mainly skeptical about the idea of consciousness replication. My statement was meant to show that even if the brain simulation created a consciousness, it wasn't the same as my consciousness, which would still disappear if I were to die.
Re: Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
And the 2nd law of thermodynamics is another gotcha, as I posted in the other Yudkowsky thread: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=377510 Someone thought maxwell's demon and the fluctuation theorem provided a way around the 2nd http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell%27s_demon http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=110074 but I'm not convinced: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=377625 "Thanks, those are interesting link…
How about a tiny, molecular sized ratchet, that would absorb vibrations due to heat and turn one way, but refuse to turn the other way due to it's ratchet teeth. These could then be hooked up to a generator for free power.
Interesting, don't know if that reverses entropy, though.