61–70 of 273 posts
Interesting that someone would choose to be cryopreserved somewhere where there's no legal assisted suicide. Wouldn't your chances of being successfully revived improve if you got cryopreserved while still alive?
Active shutdown is certainly preferable, but to the best of my knowledge is only legal in Switzerland.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Active shutdown is certainly preferable, but to the best of my knowledge is only legal in Switzerland.
That's not called 'active shutdown', that's called murder. Unless you're very ill then it is called euthanasia. Why invent new words when we have perfectly serviceable ones?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why crazy? There's good supporting evidence for sufficient preservation of fine neural structure via vitrification. The oldest existing cryopreservation organizations have lasted 40 years since their formation as professional groups. There is no known obstacle in the laws of physics to developing molecular nanotechnology capable of restoring a cryopreserved individual: it's just a technology challenge in organization…
Who's to say that the choice to survive in the distant future is desirable? Everyone you know and love will have been long dead, and any society with both the means and will to revive you may have undesirable objectives in mind, e.g. a life of slavery or military conscription. From a global perspective, what are the potential impacts on the species of an eternal elite, obsessed with life extension, creating an ever-g…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who's to say that the choice to survive in the distant future is desirable? Everyone you know and love will have been long dead, and any society with both the means and will to revive you may have undesirable objectives in mind, e.g. a life of slavery or military conscription. From a global perspective, what are the potential impacts on the species of an eternal elite, obsessed with life extension, creating an ever-g…
> Who's to say that the choice to survive in the distant future is desirable? Each individual for themselves, obviously. > Everyone you know and love will have been long dead This obviously contradicts the original assumption that you might actually get revived. Because if you can, so can others. > may have undesirable objectives in mind, e.g. a life of slavery or military conscription I find it hard to believe that…
>Each individual for themselves, obviously.
Agreed. Merely pointing out the choice does not have a clear answer.
>This obviously contradicts the original assumption that you might actually get revived. Because if you can, so can others.
Only those with spare wealth and foresight, which comprises a vanishingly small part of the current population. Most people's loved ones are unlikely to be part of that small population.
>But the bottom line is that if the future turns out to be awful, you can always choose to die again.
Any society that has mastered the technology necessary to revive you can certainly master the technology necessary to physically or chemically restrain you.
>Honestly the bigger question is why the future people would bother to wake you up at all.
That is the question. And I fear, upon waking, one may not like the answer...
I'm curious--in these cryopreservation arrangements, what is done to incentivize future people to resurrect you? Anyone know?
There is a post on the front page right now http://www.gentweb.co.uk/wirerecorder.htm about re-constructing some old wire recordings just to listen to the past. Imagine the opportunity to bring the person themselves back, instead of just audio. I think if technology advances sufficiently that it is "easy" and "cheap" enough, people will resurrect cryo-preserved patients just because it suits them to do so. If I had a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Active shutdown is certainly preferable, but to the best of my knowledge is only legal in Switzerland.
That's not called 'active shutdown', that's called murder. Unless you're very ill then it is called euthanasia. Why invent new words when we have perfectly serviceable ones?
Of course, in the POV of someone who believes in cryopreservation as a way to save lives, preventing it is almost tantamount to murder--probably falling somewhere above negligent homicide, since you'd actively be preventing someone from saving their own life.
I say that as someone who thinks the cryo-folks are deeply delusional about their technology.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Active shutdown is certainly preferable, but to the best of my knowledge is only legal in Switzerland.
That's not called 'active shutdown', that's called murder. Unless you're very ill then it is called euthanasia. Why invent new words when we have perfectly serviceable ones?
Murder is so final, while this is more akind to shutting down a computer that you hope to be able to start up again. Hence active shutdown being a more appropriate idea.
I'd love to hear your story!
I'm curious--in these cryopreservation arrangements, what is done to incentivize future people to resurrect you? Anyone know?
By the time we have the technology to revive cryopatients, that question will likely be "why not?".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not called 'active shutdown', that's called murder. Unless you're very ill then it is called euthanasia. Why invent new words when we have perfectly serviceable ones?
Words have meaning. When we hit the edge of technology those meanings tends to be obscure or wrong and so we need a new word. Murder is so final, while this is more akind to shutting down a computer that you hope to be able to start up again. Hence active shutdown being a more appropriate idea.