‘With brain preservation, nobody has to die’ • Hacker News Board

Re: ‘With brain preservation, nobody has to die’

#211

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Dec 03, 2024, 9:24 PM UTC

latexr wrote: post #74

gregjor wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To believe that the loss of a limb is so severe that death is preferable is absurd and insensitive. No. Denigrating someone expressing their personal opinion seems absurd. Since the commenter did not impose their opinions on other people you had to put those words in their mouth to call them insensitive. I prefer to die with autonomy and dignity as well, meaning I would like to pull my own plug. That other people m…

> Denigrating someone expressing their personal opinion seems absurd. (…) The commenter just described their threshold, they didn't judge other people. My sentence does not judge the person, it criticises the belief . Learn to differentiate or you’ll be doomed to a life of ad hominem attacks and taking things personally. If person A says they love spiders and person B replies they find spiders repulsive, there’s no v…

[deleted]

Re: ‘With brain preservation, nobody has to die’

#212

Post by smeej » Tue, Dec 03, 2024, 9:24 PM UTC

mensetmanusman wrote: post #203

smeej wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a difference between "I have changed" and "I have been copied." This seems obvious enough to me that I don't question it, but is it not obvious to everyone?

Copies are impossible because every moment is change with bounded but non-zero uncertainty.

The fact that "you are different" does not mean a "different you" now exists, though. Change of this specific kind is already intrinsically integrated into your existence and identity.

Re: ‘With brain preservation, nobody has to die’

#213

Post by seanmcdirmid » Tue, Dec 03, 2024, 9:25 PM UTC

suzzer99 wrote: post #146

wutwutwat wrote: post #141

“Take very high resolution scans of brain structure to characterise how someone’s neurons work, recreate it in a digital format then put it in another robotic, virtual or biological body.” This isn't preserving, it's copying. A copy of your brain/personality/you... isn't you... it's a copy. It's a cassette tape playing back the radio you recorded onto it. It's really kind of odd that people talk about brain transplan…

Suppose you died every night in your sleep and were replaced in the morning with a perfect copy of yourself with all your memories intact. Would you know the difference?

How do you think Star Trek transporters would work?

Re: ‘With brain preservation, nobody has to die’

#214

Post by bhhaskin » Tue, Dec 03, 2024, 9:25 PM UTC

danparsonson wrote: post #191

ToValueFunfetti wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This makes sense if you believe in a non-materialist self, like a soul. That model wouldn't be falsifiable- we can't measure it, so it can have whatever properties are convenient. You could then rule out the possibility that your soul would inhabit the copied 'you' by fiat. Scientifically, though: of course an exact copy of you is you. If you don't believe in souls but still feel like this is not the case, that indic…

So if we copy you into a robot and the copying process leaves you unharmed and awake, are they both you?

I think it would both be me until it started to drift, which would be almost instantly.

Re: ‘With brain preservation, nobody has to die’

#215

Post by ImPostingOnHN » Tue, Dec 03, 2024, 9:25 PM UTC

neom wrote: post #172

suzzer99 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In theory if you had an atomic replicator you should be able to make a copy of a person. I'm not saying it will ever be practically possible. But I don't see any fundamental laws of nature that make it impossible .

Unless some quantum effect doesn't actually allow that to be true, a "great filter" of sorts. Could make a copy and it just doesn't turn on, due to unknown unknowns, can't know why.

You're essentially suggesting 'maybe the laws of physics would stop applying here for unknown reasons', but it's not plausible that would happen absent evidence.

Re: ‘With brain preservation, nobody has to die’

#216

Post by kelnos » Tue, Dec 03, 2024, 9:25 PM UTC

wutwutwat wrote: post #141

“Take very high resolution scans of brain structure to characterise how someone’s neurons work, recreate it in a digital format then put it in another robotic, virtual or biological body.” This isn't preserving, it's copying. A copy of your brain/personality/you... isn't you... it's a copy. It's a cassette tape playing back the radio you recorded onto it. It's really kind of odd that people talk about brain transplan…

> This isn't preserving, it's copying. A copy of your brain/personality/you... isn't you... it's a copy. It's a cassette tape playing back the radio you recorded onto it.

That's just one opinion, though. We still don't know what consciousness really is. We don't know what makes us who we are. We don't know if some concept (scientific or supernatural) of a "soul" exists apart from the behavior that arises from the physical structures of the brain.

We just don't know. So maybe you're right, but that's far from clear.

Re: ‘With brain preservation, nobody has to die’

#217

Post by smeej » Tue, Dec 03, 2024, 9:25 PM UTC

wutwutwat wrote: post #209

smeej wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a great deal of difficulty going to sleep the night after this first occurred to me. I only really managed to assuage my fear by realizing there would be an incredible number of dead bodies to deal with if this were happening to everyone every night, and it was extremely unlikely it was only happening to me.

You're taking what the above person said too literally. They didn't mean physically dying, they meant your mind dies every night when you sleep and in the morning a new mind/a copy of your previous mind, is what wakes up and continues on as you.

I'm not merely a mind. I am an embodied mind.

Re: ‘With brain preservation, nobody has to die’

#218

Post by geye1234 » Tue, Dec 03, 2024, 9:26 PM UTC

ToValueFunfetti wrote: post #183

wutwutwat wrote: post #141

“Take very high resolution scans of brain structure to characterise how someone’s neurons work, recreate it in a digital format then put it in another robotic, virtual or biological body.” This isn't preserving, it's copying. A copy of your brain/personality/you... isn't you... it's a copy. It's a cassette tape playing back the radio you recorded onto it. It's really kind of odd that people talk about brain transplan…

This makes sense if you believe in a non-materialist self, like a soul. That model wouldn't be falsifiable- we can't measure it, so it can have whatever properties are convenient. You could then rule out the possibility that your soul would inhabit the copied 'you' by fiat. Scientifically, though: of course an exact copy of you is you. If you don't believe in souls but still feel like this is not the case, that indic…

I don't believe in a soul in the sense of a "ghost in a machine", since it introduces so many problems. Nonetheless, it's pretty clear that there is an immaterial component to thought, and therefore to our existence, for various reasons. Examples:

1. If we are entirely material, we can't know anything. For example, if you're thinking about a tree, there must be something about you that has 'grasped' what it is to be a tree. This is impossible if your idea of a tree is nothing more than a bunch of neurons firing in a given way. There is no correspondence between neurons firing and a tree. So there must be more to your thought than neurons firing (or any other material process).

2. Similarly, if we're entirely material, we can't reason. A reasonable thought differs from an unreasonable thought only by its content. It can't differ in this way by its material components in the brain. Therefore, if we hold that some thoughts are wrong and others are right, we must conclude that there is more to our thought than the material.

Re: ‘With brain preservation, nobody has to die’

#219

Post by wutwutwat » Tue, Dec 03, 2024, 9:26 PM UTC

suzzer99 wrote: post #178

wutwutwat wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would probably get a concentrated dose of existential dread knowing that by EOD I would cease to exist. Usually I'm able to delay that dread with the silly reasoning that I still have many years left before I die, but I wouldn't have that mind hack if I knew I had no time left.

Why not go out with a bang and spend your life savings on hookers and blow (or whatever decadent thing floats your boat)? My point is that I suspect most of us wouldn't do anything differently, even if we know it's not our consciousness continuing on, because both scenarios are identical for all practical purposes.

You're right, nothing would change, and both scenarios do play out the same. The difference would be the knowing about it part. That's what changes things for me. If it currently happens that way I wouldn't be aware of it, but if I knew that it was going to happen, the act of knowing, makes it an issue, for me anyway, even if it still plays out the same as every other time.

Re: ‘With brain preservation, nobody has to die’

#220

Post by suzzer99 » Tue, Dec 03, 2024, 9:26 PM UTC

wutwutwat wrote: post #209

smeej wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a great deal of difficulty going to sleep the night after this first occurred to me. I only really managed to assuage my fear by realizing there would be an incredible number of dead bodies to deal with if this were happening to everyone every night, and it was extremely unlikely it was only happening to me.

You're taking what the above person said too literally. They didn't mean physically dying, they meant your mind dies every night when you sleep and in the morning a new mind/a copy of your previous mind, is what wakes up and continues on as you.

Now smeej won't be able to sleep at night again.