If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Science Daily)   Waiting for your first immortality treatment? Look no further   (sciencedaily.com) divider line 90
    More: Cool, discovery, adult stem cell, tumor suppressors, sewage treatment, stem cells, bone marrow transplant, degenerative disease, oxidants  
•       •       •

5882 clicks; posted to Geek » on 01 Feb 2013 at 7:38 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



90 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-02-01 07:04:29 AM  
images2.wikia.nocookie.net

Approves.

/hot like organic superlube
 
2013-02-01 07:35:31 AM  
Excellent, does this mean we can go back to discussing future projects in space without someone telling us all we're nutters?

You got your wish, now let us have ours.  I'm gonna 3d print me a moon base so fast your head will spin!
 
2013-02-01 07:43:13 AM  

Slaxl: Excellent, does this mean we can go back to discussing future projects in space without someone telling us all we're nutters?


I wouldn't hold your breath.

/paging QA to thread 7568433
 
2013-02-01 07:46:43 AM  

miss diminutive: [images2.wikia.nocookie.net image 149x178]

Approves.

/hot like organic superlube


damn this came sooner than expected.
 
2013-02-01 07:48:17 AM  

wedun: miss diminutive: [images2.wikia.nocookie.net image 149x178]

Approves.

/hot like organic superlube

damn this came sooner than expected.


Sounds like you're supposed to be in the virginity scarring thread.
 
2013-02-01 07:51:51 AM  
Good.  Sign me up.  I need at least a few more centuries so I can do all the stuff I've been wanting to do.
 
2013-02-01 07:56:18 AM  
The funny thing is that the first people to ever get such treatment are likely the people who deserve to die first.
 
2013-02-01 08:01:35 AM  
but there can be only one.
 
2013-02-01 08:04:42 AM  
Ha ha ha, you stupid bastards, like this will ever work, I mean, if you live forever, what's the point unless it's on a colony on Mars or a trip to Alpha Centauri?

/REVERSE SCHRODINGER'S PUNCTUATION
 
2013-02-01 08:07:52 AM  

ComicBookGuy: The funny thing is that the first people to ever get such treatment are likely the people who deserve to die first.


Hot scientist's daughters?
 
2013-02-01 08:10:40 AM  
I'm going to go ahead and start putting stuff off.
 
2013-02-01 08:17:10 AM  
This sucks...it's now going to be even harder to get that promotion if the mid to upper management guys won't ever have to die...worse, we pleebs won't be able to move into those positions that would allow us to afford these treatments. There will be a new caste system, those elites who get to live forever and have their lives pampered by us normies who are poor and just function to make their lives more comfortable....
Or, we can destroy this lab and prevent this horrible future before it even has a chance to occure.
 
2013-02-01 08:19:00 AM  
ShutUpAndTakeMyMoney.jpg
 
2013-02-01 08:20:23 AM  

ComicBookGuy: The funny thing is that the first people to ever get such treatment are likely the people who deserve to die first.


Poor college kids who volunteer for experimental treatments?
 
2013-02-01 08:21:52 AM  
What if you and your wife only have enough money for one treatment?
Who gets it?
You or your girlfriend?
 
2013-02-01 08:22:31 AM  
anti-oxidants?

graphics8.nytimes.com

/obscure?
 
2013-02-01 08:23:41 AM  
There can be only ONE!
 
2013-02-01 08:24:19 AM  
The day we conquer aging is the day we condemn every human on earth to a violent death.

/Suicide would become the only painless option
//It would bring on many changes
///But you could take or leave it as you please
 
2013-02-01 08:29:54 AM  
The problem with being alive now is that we're probably only 60 or 70 years from the average human lifespan of a new born hitting 200.

Which is a bummer, to be last people boarding the Titanic.
 
2013-02-01 08:35:27 AM  

ryarger: The day we conquer aging is the day we condemn every human on earth to a violent death.


Guess we shouldn't be trying to cure diseases, either.
 
2013-02-01 08:37:44 AM  
Read the headline as "Waiting for your first immorality treatment? Look no further" and wondered why they were posting a story about a Tea Party Youth Group.
 
2013-02-01 08:42:14 AM  

Wolf892: This sucks...it's now going to be even harder to get that promotion if the mid to upper management guys won't ever have to die...worse, we pleebs won't be able to move into those positions that would allow us to afford these treatments. There will be a new caste system, those elites who get to live forever and have their lives pampered by us normies who are poor and just function to make their lives more comfortable....
Or, we can destroy this lab and prevent this horrible future before it even has a chance to occure.


Guess you all forgot what happened last time we tried to manipulate DNA to create a better person
 
2013-02-01 08:48:46 AM  
I know how to achieve a sort of immortality, but there would be loads of people saying it was a conspiracy and you probably wouldn't come out the other side alive.
 
2013-02-01 08:49:59 AM  

ComicBookGuy: The funny thing is that the first people to ever get such treatment are likely the people who deserve to die first.


Mice people?
 
2013-02-01 08:54:58 AM  

sxacho: Mice people?


Mice guys finish last.
 
2013-02-01 08:59:08 AM  
Do we really need people living longer? The world is dealing with a population explosion already, and unless we have some big plague or war, we will soon outstrip the earth's ability to feed  us (even with GM crops).
 
2013-02-01 09:04:54 AM  

Counter_Intelligent: ryarger: The day we conquer aging is the day we condemn every human on earth to a violent death.

Guess we shouldn't be trying to cure diseases, either.


Who said we shouldn't try to conquer aging or disease? I was pointing out what I see as an interesting fact.
 
2013-02-01 09:08:52 AM  
Is this the QA thread? Bookmark.
 
2013-02-01 09:11:01 AM  
Yeah, the first problem you will see with "immortality" treatments is that the first people in line for them will also be the first people telling us why everyone else shouldn't have them.

A bit like people who are concerned about climate change from their mansion or on board their private jet or people who think the population should be disarmed while they sit in guarded communities.
 
2013-02-01 09:12:21 AM  
YOLO
 
2013-02-01 09:21:37 AM  

miss diminutive: Slaxl: Excellent, does this mean we can go back to discussing future projects in space without someone telling us all we're nutters?

I wouldn't hold your breath.

/paging QA to thread 7568433


i106.photobucket.com

Well, guess you wanted to play that card
 
2013-02-01 09:22:46 AM  

LesserEvil: Do we really need people living longer? The world is dealing with a population explosion already, and unless we have some big plague or war, we will soon outstrip the earth's ability to feed  us (even with GM crops).


Actually, as women keep getting educated, the birthrate keeps falling. In a few decades, we'll hit peak population, and then we'll experience a global downturn in the birthrate. Soon, we'll probably have a crisis as the birthrate falls below replacement levels, and we'll have all the sorts of issues that the Baby Boomers are causing now (aging population) but on a much greater scale.
 
2013-02-01 09:42:29 AM  
So a couple of decades from now I guess the term "Birther" is going to take on a whole new meaning.

I'm done reproducing... I'll hit up the Rejoo clinic.
 
2013-02-01 09:44:01 AM  

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: LesserEvil: Do we really need people living longer? The world is dealing with a population explosion already, and unless we have some big plague or war, we will soon outstrip the earth's ability to feed  us (even with GM crops).

Actually, as women keep getting educated, the birthrate keeps falling. In a few decades, we'll hit peak population, and then we'll experience a global downturn in the birthrate. Soon, we'll probably have a crisis as the birthrate falls below replacement levels, and we'll have all the sorts of issues that the Baby Boomers are causing now (aging population) but on a much greater scale.


Are you suggesting we withhold life-extending technology from countries that do not educate their women? There are still plenty of cultures thriving on this planet that insist on breeding at insane rates (traditions that originated because of high mortality rates that no longer exist today). If anything, we've only seen the birth rates climb in less "progressive" nations.
 
2013-02-01 09:47:23 AM  

LesserEvil: Do we really need people living longer? The world is dealing with a population explosion already, and unless we have some big plague or war, we will soon outstrip the earth's ability to feed  us (even with GM crops).


Make a law that says you can only be immortal if you don't have kids.  Once you have kids, the process is undone.
 
2013-02-01 10:26:25 AM  

Bungles: The problem with being alive now is that we're probably only 60 or 70 years from the average human lifespan of a new born hitting 200.

Which is a bummer, to be last people boarding the Titanic.


Unless you're 30 like me. 30 years from now the average life span will be 100 or so, and 40 years from then, 200, and 100 years from then 500. I'm in just under the curve, or so I'd like to think.

\I'm going to be the first person to get out of life alive
\\just like everyone else
 
2013-02-01 10:30:08 AM  

KellyX: miss diminutive: Slaxl: Excellent, does this mean we can go back to discussing future projects in space without someone telling us all we're nutters?

I wouldn't hold your breath.

/paging QA to thread 7568433



Well, guess you wanted to play that card


He always seems to fail to show up for positive threads on life extension.
 
2013-02-01 10:31:20 AM  
Great musicians will still die young.
And Kenny G will go on and on and on....
 
2013-02-01 10:31:47 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: LesserEvil: Do we really need people living longer? The world is dealing with a population explosion already, and unless we have some big plague or war, we will soon outstrip the earth's ability to feed  us (even with GM crops).

Make a law that says you can only be immortal if you don't have kids.  Once you have kids, the process is undone.


Just make the process sterilize them
 
2013-02-01 10:33:41 AM  
upload.wikimedia.org

You are not yet ready for immortality.
 
2013-02-01 10:34:41 AM  

Hiro Nakamura: So a couple of decades from now I guess the term "Birther" is going to take on a whole new meaning.


The new pejorative will be "breeder".

/60-ish and willing to take my first treatment today
//happy immortality everyone! :^)
 
2013-02-01 10:47:38 AM  

KellyX: miss diminutive: Slaxl: Excellent, does this mean we can go back to discussing future projects in space without someone telling us all we're nutters?

I wouldn't hold your breath.

/paging QA to thread 7568433

[i106.photobucket.com image 525x750]

Well, guess you wanted to play that card


You know you've made it as a troll on fark when...
 
2013-02-01 10:58:13 AM  
The only way I'd want immortality is if I could live digitally. I read about a month ago or so about scientists working on developing the kinds of computers that would let people download into them at the end of their lives (or sooner), and I think the idea is kind of intriguing. If I could have some control over my virtual environment (I wanna fly, dammit!) then I might be happier going Matrix style.
 
2013-02-01 10:59:22 AM  

Grither: KellyX: miss diminutive: Slaxl: Excellent, does this mean we can go back to discussing future projects in space without someone telling us all we're nutters?

I wouldn't hold your breath.

/paging QA to thread 7568433

[i106.photobucket.com image 525x750]

Well, guess you wanted to play that card

You know you've made it as a troll on fark when...


I want to believe that he's just a genuine old man, approaching the end of his life, and angry that kids want to focus on something that he won't be around to see. So he gets his nurse to prop up his bed, help him up so he can write, calling us all nutters because there aren't enough elements to build craft capable of travelling in space, when we should be investigating ageless atoms.
 
2013-02-01 11:01:05 AM  

geek_mars: The only way I'd want immortality is if I could live digitally. I read about a month ago or so about scientists working on developing the kinds of computers that would let people download into them at the end of their lives (or sooner), and I think the idea is kind of intriguing. If I could have some control over my virtual environment (I wanna fly, dammit!) then I might be happier going Matrix style.


Yeh, but when you think no one's looking you load up sex.exe, but some ruthless human TV exec bought the rights to your digital life to broadcast your world, now everyone sees.
 
2013-02-01 11:03:09 AM  

LesserEvil: Are you suggesting we withhold life-extending technology from countries that do not educate their women?


well that's a radical interpretation of the text....
 
2013-02-01 11:13:42 AM  

Slaxl: geek_mars: The only way I'd want immortality is if I could live digitally. I read about a month ago or so about scientists working on developing the kinds of computers that would let people download into them at the end of their lives (or sooner), and I think the idea is kind of intriguing. If I could have some control over my virtual environment (I wanna fly, dammit!) then I might be happier going Matrix style.

Yeh, but when you think no one's looking you load up sex.exe, but some ruthless human TV exec bought the rights to your digital life to broadcast your world, now everyone sees.


Couldn't be any worse than the Truman Show.
 
2013-02-01 11:17:38 AM  

geek_mars: The only way I'd want immortality is if I could live digitally. I read about a month ago or so about scientists working on developing the kinds of computers that would let people download into them at the end of their lives (or sooner), and I think the idea is kind of intriguing. If I could have some control over my virtual environment (I wanna fly, dammit!) then I might be happier going Matrix style.


Oh face it we would all lock ourselves into a pleasure loop and that would be that. Nobody would fly we would just all experience ultimate pleasure, happiness, joy etc... all the time. Right up until janitor Bob accidentally drops coffee on the the number three generator causing a massive surge in electricity and frying all the computers finally killing 9 trillion "people".
 
2013-02-01 11:18:32 AM  

Slaxl: Grither: KellyX: miss diminutive: Slaxl: Excellent, does this mean we can go back to discussing future projects in space without someone telling us all we're nutters?

I wouldn't hold your breath.

/paging QA to thread 7568433

[i106.photobucket.com image 525x750]

Well, guess you wanted to play that card

You know you've made it as a troll on fark when...

I want to believe that he's just a genuine old man, approaching the end of his life, and angry that kids want to focus on something that he won't be around to see. So he gets his nurse to prop up his bed, help him up so he can write, calling us all nutters because there aren't enough elements to build craft capable of travelling in space, when we should be investigating ageless atoms.


I hear all his posts in the voice of the redlettermedia guy
 
2013-02-01 11:19:37 AM  

hobberwickey: Bungles: The problem with being alive now is that we're probably only 60 or 70 years from the average human lifespan of a new born hitting 200.

Which is a bummer, to be last people boarding the Titanic.

Unless you're 30 like me. 30 years from now the average life span will be 100 or so, and 40 years from then, 200, and 100 years from then 500. I'm in just under the curve, or so I'd like to think.

\I'm going to be the first person to get out of life alive
\\just like everyone else



I''m probably the same age as you, but I think we've missed the boat (or rather, the boat hasn't launched yet and only takes babies)

I suspect that a lot of the genetic ending to aging (which is coming) will require a little pre-birth fiddling, to stop teleomere degradation and all that. The people in 60 years or so who won't age to infirmity any more are probably going to be the new folk, not us. I'm sure I read somewhere that the average age of death, if we eliminate aging, will be in the low 200s.
 
2013-02-01 11:29:28 AM  

Bungles: hobberwickey: Bungles: The problem with being alive now is that we're probably only 60 or 70 years from the average human lifespan of a new born hitting 200.

Which is a bummer, to be last people boarding the Titanic.

Unless you're 30 like me. 30 years from now the average life span will be 100 or so, and 40 years from then, 200, and 100 years from then 500. I'm in just under the curve, or so I'd like to think.

\I'm going to be the first person to get out of life alive
\\just like everyone else


I''m probably the same age as you, but I think we've missed the boat (or rather, the boat hasn't launched yet and only takes babies)

I suspect that a lot of the genetic ending to aging (which is coming) will require a little pre-birth fiddling, to stop teleomere degradation and all that. The people in 60 years or so who won't age to infirmity any more are probably going to be the new folk, not us. I'm sure I read somewhere that the average age of death, if we eliminate aging, will be in the low 200s.


I'm factoring in the ability to manipulate genes in adults, which is far off, but not that far off considering what we can do now and considering it was only what 10-15 years ago that we sequenced the first human genome? The pace genetic research has on has been amazing and from my understanding we're still in the 'let's try this and see what happens' stage of genetic research. Once we start to figure out predictive models for DNA like we have for physics, forget about it, we'll have pills that let you grow tails.
 
2013-02-01 11:39:59 AM  
 
2013-02-01 11:59:05 AM  

geek_mars: The only way I'd want immortality is if I could live digitally. I read about a month ago or so about scientists working on developing the kinds of computers that would let people download into them at the end of their lives (or sooner), and I think the idea is kind of intriguing. If I could have some control over my virtual environment (I wanna fly, dammit!) then I might be happier going Matrix style.


So do you think that your consciousness would continue in your digital self, or would it be a copy that thinks it's a continuation of the original you?  Put another way, lets say that you merge your organic brain with a digital brain.  If your organic body dies, is the digital brain really now "you"?  I'm sure it would believe it is, but I'm also sure that if we revived your organic body, it would disagree.

Much like the teleporter thought problem, I tend to think that if you download your consciousness into a computer (or teleport your body to another place) the original you dies, and is replaced by a copy that has all of your memories.  To an observer, there is no difference.  But there would be no continuity of self and thought, so you're still dead.

/no, seriously, I'm not high
 
2013-02-01 12:21:22 PM  

geek_mars: The only way I'd want immortality is if I could live digitally. I read about a month ago or so about scientists working on developing the kinds of computers that would let people download into them at the end of their lives (or sooner), and I think the idea is kind of intriguing. If I could have some control over my virtual environment (I wanna fly, dammit!) then I might be happier going Matrix style.


I have long argued that advanced civilizations "go Matrix style" when they achieve the capability, rather than spreading out into their galaxies. Interstellar travel for living organisms seems so difficult that it simply isn't done, and may even appear pointless once a civilization is capable of making its own Matrix-like universes.
 
2013-02-01 12:26:44 PM  

Erix: geek_mars: The only way I'd want immortality is if I could live digitally. I read about a month ago or so about scientists working on developing the kinds of computers that would let people download into them at the end of their lives (or sooner), and I think the idea is kind of intriguing. If I could have some control over my virtual environment (I wanna fly, dammit!) then I might be happier going Matrix style.

So do you think that your consciousness would continue in your digital self, or would it be a copy that thinks it's a continuation of the original you?  Put another way, lets say that you merge your organic brain with a digital brain.  If your organic body dies, is the digital brain really now "you"?  I'm sure it would believe it is, but I'm also sure that if we revived your organic body, it would disagree.

Much like the teleporter thought problem, I tend to think that if you download your consciousness into a computer (or teleport your body to another place) the original you dies, and is replaced by a copy that has all of your memories.  To an observer, there is no difference.  But there would be no continuity of self and thought, so you're still dead.

/no, seriously, I'm not high


I have also spent many minutes pondering that exact dilemma, whilst not high. A copy of you may be indistinguishable from you to others, and even to yourself, and while both might think they were the original since they have the same memories, only one really is. Only one is really you, so if you die and the other takes over there may still be a version of you in the world doing exactly what you'd do, but it's not you. Your consciousness has ceased. The same as a transporter in Star Trek. I'm not a star trek fan but from what I gather it breaks you down into atoms to scan and then rebuilds but using different atoms. It would cease the stream of consciousness coming from your head, and create a new one.

I think I might be high now. I've certainly taken what you said, clear and concise, at least as concise as one can be on this topic, and done nothing to help. I applaud my efforts.
 
2013-02-01 12:27:05 PM  
I don't know. Doc Brown didn't look any different.
 
2013-02-01 12:31:22 PM  
Well, so much for the population problem solving itself.
 
2013-02-01 12:35:07 PM  

LewDux: Who wants to live foreveeeeeeeeeer


Forever? I don't know. Ask me in 500 years.
 
2013-02-01 12:39:44 PM  

Slaxl: I have also spent many minutes pondering that exact dilemma, whilst not high. A copy of you may be indistinguishable from you to others, and even to yourself, and while both might think they were the original since they have the same memories, only one really is. Only one is really you, so if you die and the other takes over there may still be a version of you in the world doing exactly what you'd do, but it's not you. Your consciousness has ceased.


What makes you say that? After all, in 'real life' you are constantly flushing spent cells and growing new ones. IIRC, the longest lived cells in you body live only about 7 years, some live only a matter of days (skin cells?). IOW, you're constantly doing a slo-mo Star Trek-like decomposition and recomposition. Yet nobody seriously claims you're not the same person you were yesterday or 7 years ago.

The key, it strikes me, is continuity. If continuity is maintained, the new you IS you, irrespective of your form.
 
2013-02-01 12:43:49 PM  

Stone Meadow: Slaxl: I have also spent many minutes pondering that exact dilemma, whilst not high. A copy of you may be indistinguishable from you to others, and even to yourself, and while both might think they were the original since they have the same memories, only one really is. Only one is really you, so if you die and the other takes over there may still be a version of you in the world doing exactly what you'd do, but it's not you. Your consciousness has ceased.

What makes you say that? After all, in 'real life' you are constantly flushing spent cells and growing new ones. IIRC, the longest lived cells in you body live only about 7 years, some live only a matter of days (skin cells?). IOW, you're constantly doing a slo-mo Star Trek-like decomposition and recomposition. Yet nobody seriously claims you're not the same person you were yesterday or 7 years ago.

The key, it strikes me, is continuity. If continuity is maintained, the new you IS you, irrespective of your form.


I think you're right, it's all a matter of continuity.  If you just "download" your brain, you're really making a copy, not moving your consciousness.  You'd have to essentially merge the two, and then slowly shut down the organic portion.  How slowly?  Does it matter?  I dunno, but I think it does for some reason.
 
2013-02-01 12:45:32 PM  

geek_mars: The only way I'd want immortality is if I could live digitally. I read about a month ago or so about scientists working on developing the kinds of computers that would let people download into them at the end of their lives (or sooner), and I think the idea is kind of intriguing. If I could have some control over my virtual environment (I wanna fly, dammit!) then I might be happier going Matrix style.


That's my plan.  I'm going to download my self into 10,000 deep space probes and explore the galaxy.
 
2013-02-01 12:46:46 PM  

Slaxl: I have also spent many minutes pondering that exact dilemma, whilst not high. A copy of you may be indistinguishable from you to others, and even to yourself, and while both might think they were the original since they have the same memories, only one really is. Only one is really you, so if you die and the other takes over there may still be a version of you in the world doing exactly what you'd do, but it's not you. Your consciousness has ceased. The same as a transporter in Star Trek. I'm not a star trek fan but from what I gather it breaks you down into atoms to scan and then rebuilds but using different atoms. It would cease the stream of consciousness coming from your head, and create a new one.

I think I might be high now. I've certainly taken what you said, clear and concise, at least as concise as one can be on this topic, and done nothing to help. I applaud my efforts.


Hah, well I'm not sure how clear an existential topic like this can really get.

I've often thought of writing a sci-fi short story where the teleporter is invented, and one guy realizes that it's essentially destroying the original people and replacing them with soulless copies, but everyone else uses it anyways, until he's the only person left with a soul on earth.

/don't really believe in souls, but I still think it's a cool idea.
//of course, this has probably already been written..
 
2013-02-01 01:07:51 PM  

Erix: Stone Meadow: The key, it strikes me, is continuity. If continuity is maintained, the new you IS you, irrespective of your form.

I think you're right, it's all a matter of continuity.  If you just "download" your brain, you're really making a copy, not moving your consciousness.  You'd have to essentially merge the two, and then slowly shut down the organic portion.  How slowly?  Does it matter?  I dunno, but I think it does for some reason.


Hans Moravec addresses this issue in one (or more) or his books. He speculates that the merger process would proceed as fast as the technology is capable, with one's consciousness starting off wholly in the brain and smoothly transitioning to partially, then wholly in the 'computer'. IIRC, he says the process is inherently destructive, as the computer is literally creating a virtual network based on the physical interconnections of your brain as it's progressively mapped-by-destruction. Whether he's correct is an open question that will only be answered in time, but I for one hope to be there, and slowing/reversing senescence is the start.
 
2013-02-01 01:49:32 PM  

Stone Meadow: I have long argued that advanced civilizations "go Matrix style" when they achieve the capability, rather than spreading out into their galaxies.


Yes. This has always been my answer to the Fermi Paradox.
 
2013-02-01 01:51:33 PM  

Mr. Eugenides: That's my plan.  I'm going to download my self into 10,000 deep space probes and explore the galaxy.


I would switch my consciousness on for a fraction of a second every century or so so I could get a sense of motion with my travels and not "die" of boredom.
 
2013-02-01 01:56:13 PM  

Mr. Eugenides: geek_mars: The only way I'd want immortality is if I could live digitally. I read about a month ago or so about scientists working on developing the kinds of computers that would let people download into them at the end of their lives (or sooner), and I think the idea is kind of intriguing. If I could have some control over my virtual environment (I wanna fly, dammit!) then I might be happier going Matrix style.

That's my plan.  I'm going to download my self into 10,000 deep space probes and explore the galaxy.


Which would be awesome, but without instantaneous communication between them, I think you'd probably be limited to just directly experiencing one of them.  Better to hang back and have them send their experiences back to you.
 
2013-02-01 02:00:24 PM  

Stone Meadow: Slaxl: I have also spent many minutes pondering that exact dilemma, whilst not high. A copy of you may be indistinguishable from you to others, and even to yourself, and while both might think they were the original since they have the same memories, only one really is. Only one is really you, so if you die and the other takes over there may still be a version of you in the world doing exactly what you'd do, but it's not you. Your consciousness has ceased.

What makes you say that? After all, in 'real life' you are constantly flushing spent cells and growing new ones. IIRC, the longest lived cells in you body live only about 7 years, some live only a matter of days (skin cells?). IOW, you're constantly doing a slo-mo Star Trek-like decomposition and recomposition. Yet nobody seriously claims you're not the same person you were yesterday or 7 years ago.

The key, it strikes me, is continuity. If continuity is maintained, the new you IS you, irrespective of your form.


If you make an identical copy of yourself, and you stand next to it, one is the one that created the copy, and one is the copy. So only one would really be you, as in the original you that made the stuff happen.

Yes we are all fresh every 7 years or so, but there is continuation throughout. If we regenerated by ceasing to exist, collapsing into a pile of atoms, and then regrowing out of a whole new, unconnected atoms, we would not be able to continue to exist as ourselves, it would be a copy consciousness, not an original. For you it would be as dying.
 
2013-02-01 02:55:11 PM  

Slaxl: Yes we are all fresh every 7 years or so, but there is continuation throughout. If we regenerated by ceasing to exist, collapsing into a pile of atoms, and then regrowing out of a whole new, unconnected atoms, we would not be able to continue to exist as ourselves, it would be a copy consciousness, not an original. For you it would be as dying.


Not if those atoms were entangled with the atoms on the other side of the transportation!
 
2013-02-01 03:15:40 PM  
So, we're going to have Lazarus Pits? Hope we can conquer the temporary psychosis.
 
2013-02-01 03:19:27 PM  

Slaxl: Stone Meadow: The key, it strikes me, is continuity. If continuity is maintained, the new you IS you, irrespective of your form.

If you make an identical copy of yourself, and you stand next to it, one is the one that created the copy, and one is the copy. So only one would really be you, as in the original you that made the stuff happen.


If one makes an identical copy, then yes. However, I was referring to Moravec's description of a hypothetical destructive process. As I note above, though, he may simply be wrong about the need for destruction to occur. It may be, and increasing seems more likely to me, that we will be able to recreate your brain's neural network virtually by increasing the resolution of MRI-like imaging technologies. If that is the case, then *you* would continue to live out your life while an alter-ego enters the Matrix. There would be no need to stand next to it...you would be you and it would be it.

That brings up a whole host of legal and ethical issues, though, and there may be laws in future to prevent autonomous multiple copies of oneself.  

Yes we are all fresh every 7 years or so, but there is continuation throughout. If we regenerated by ceasing to exist, collapsing into a pile of atoms, and then regrowing out of a whole new, unconnected atoms, we would not be able to continue to exist as ourselves, it would be a copy consciousness, not an original. For you it would be as dying.

Going back to Moravec's scenario, you wouldn't experience any death, as you would remain conscious throughout the transfer procedure. At its conclusion your body would be there, brain dead and awaiting organ harvesting, and ultimately feedstock for the soylent green vats, but your existence would continue without interruption. ;)
 
2013-02-01 03:45:10 PM  

Stone Meadow: Going back to Moravec's scenario, you wouldn't experience any death, as you would remain conscious throughout the transfer procedure. At its conclusion your body would be there, brain dead and awaiting organ harvesting, and ultimately feedstock for the soylent green vats, but your existence would continue without interruption. ;)


The trouble is, whether or not it really was the same "continuous" you, the digital you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.  Not that it would make any difference to anyone but you.

Never read any of the Moravec scenario, but the destructive aspect of it seems almost like a ploy to avoid having to deal with the implications of having two copies of the same consciousness running around.  If you merge a mind with a computer, copying all of the important info over, and then shut down the body, I could be convinced that there was a continuation of consciousness and you really have transferred.  But if the body just gets shut down by being placed in a deep coma, then gets separated and subsequently revived, where does the "continued" consciousness reside?  Which half?  They'd both think it was them, but only one could really be it.. right?
 
2013-02-01 06:33:30 PM  
There will always be some timer or another that's going to send us down the road to old age. The body will continue making small missteps, with mutated and divergent results as time goes by. Also,  women run out of eggs eventuall. They only get so many and when that process ends, their body chemistry shifts.

I have some atheist friends who refuse to believe in god and heaven, but believe they can be frozen and brought back or who are lobbying the government to find a "cure" for old age. They've replaced one cultish belief with another. No matter how many times I tell them that there will be no profit in resurrecting an elderly computer programmer in poor health and in poor shape with defunct skills, they persist in believing that someone will bring them back because they are somehow valuable. No, sweetcheeks, you're not.
 
2013-02-01 06:36:08 PM  
Hooray. Now I can be a wage slave forever!!!
 
2013-02-01 06:40:39 PM  
mandatory abortions with each immortality shot, It's the only way,


besides, some people need to die


I got to wait 200 years to inherit the house? Dad, have you seen my gun?
 
2013-02-01 06:48:20 PM  

DarkSoulNoHope: Hooray. Now I can be a wage slave forever!!!


That. Unless the planet magically becomes a post-scarcity based society, there's no much of a point in living forever if you're going to need to work for another several hundred years just to survive and afford whatever treatments needed to stay immortal. No turn over, no job openings for the younger generation growing up, no chance to retire and live out your final years doing whatever the hell you want. Yeah, I think I'll wait for immortality thank you very much.
 
2013-02-01 06:59:32 PM  

Kanemano: mandatory abortions with each immortality shot, It's the only way,


besides, some people need to die


I got to wait 200 years to inherit the house? Dad, have you seen my gun?


I have to have an abortion?  I don't.. won't that.. huh?
 
2013-02-01 07:00:54 PM  

rickycal78: DarkSoulNoHope: Hooray. Now I can be a wage slave forever!!!

That. Unless the planet magically becomes a post-scarcity based society, there's no much of a point in living forever if you're going to need to work for another several hundred years just to survive and afford whatever treatments needed to stay immortal. No turn over, no job openings for the younger generation growing up, no chance to retire and live out your final years doing whatever the hell you want. Yeah, I think I'll wait for immortality thank you very much.


Well, it would certainly be a catalyst for an off-world exodus then..
 
2013-02-01 07:04:32 PM  

Erix: Kanemano: mandatory abortions with each immortality shot, It's the only way,


besides, some people need to die


I got to wait 200 years to inherit the house? Dad, have you seen my gun?

I have to have an abortion?  I don't.. won't that.. huh?


OK sterilizations,

give me a break it's 2PM and I am hung over.
 
2013-02-01 07:16:48 PM  

Kanemano: Erix: Kanemano: mandatory abortions with each immortality shot, It's the only way,


besides, some people need to die


I got to wait 200 years to inherit the house? Dad, have you seen my gun?

I have to have an abortion?  I don't.. won't that.. huh?

OK sterilizations,

give me a break it's 2PM and I am hung over.


I really would rather have seen you try to explain the abortions for everyone part.
 
2013-02-01 07:28:12 PM  

Erix: Kanemano: Erix: Kanemano: mandatory abortions with each immortality shot, It's the only way,


besides, some people need to die


I got to wait 200 years to inherit the house? Dad, have you seen my gun?

I have to have an abortion?  I don't.. won't that.. huh?

OK sterilizations,

give me a break it's 2PM and I am hung over.

I really would rather have seen you try to explain the abortions for everyone part.


OK

The sperm in each man is naught but a miniature man waiting to grow to full size so we must pluck these little men apart and dispose of them to preserve our way of life in the future because they are not our children, but our competitors for dwindling resources.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homunculus

and you thought your great grandpa was smart
 
2013-02-02 05:07:23 AM  

0Icky0: What if you and your wife only have enough money for one treatment?
Who gets it?
You or your girlfriend?


Me.  My wife has Asian-time-warp, and will look 16 for the next 30 years, so she's already set.
 
2013-02-02 10:49:41 AM  

Z-clipped: Me.  My wife has Asian-time-warp, and will look 16 for the next 30 years, so she's already set.


I know what that's like.
And I like it.
 
2013-02-02 08:11:42 PM  

Erix: But there would be no continuity of self and thought, so you're still dead.


If you think "continuity of self" is critical to identity maintenance, you don't understand the process of cellular replacement within your body.

If you think "continuity of thought" is critical to identity maintenance, you must hate going to bed every night. "Sleep, those little slices of death -- how I loathe them."
 
2013-02-03 06:37:58 AM  

jfarkinB: Erix: But there would be no continuity of self and thought, so you're still dead.

If you think "continuity of self" is critical to identity maintenance, you don't understand the process of cellular replacement within your body.

If you think "continuity of thought" is critical to identity maintenance, you must hate going to bed every night. "Sleep, those little slices of death -- how I loathe them."


When you go to sleep your entire personage and every cell and every atom is not replaced by a new set. It is a gradual process, which allows the "continuity of self" to continue.

If you think being deconstructed and reassembled elsewhere will leave you as the same you that entered the magic transportational teleportamatron, then you're mistaken. Our self, our thoughts, etc are all tied to these atoms in our bodies. If they were destroyed to be reconstructed elsewhere then the reconstruction would think it was you, and so would everyone else, but the original you still died, you would never rematerialise.
 
2013-02-03 07:29:56 AM  

Slaxl: jfarkinB: Erix: But there would be no continuity of self and thought, so you're still dead.

If you think "continuity of self" is critical to identity maintenance, you don't understand the process of cellular replacement within your body.

If you think "continuity of thought" is critical to identity maintenance, you must hate going to bed every night. "Sleep, those little slices of death -- how I loathe them."

When you go to sleep your entire personage and every cell and every atom is not replaced by a new set. It is a gradual process, which allows the "continuity of self" to continue.

If you think being deconstructed and reassembled elsewhere will leave you as the same you that entered the magic transportational teleportamatron, then you're mistaken. Our self, our thoughts, etc are all tied to these atoms in our bodies. If they were destroyed to be reconstructed elsewhere then the reconstruction would think it was you, and so would everyone else, but the original you still died, you would never rematerialise.


This position is really only valid if you believe in the supernatural (the soul, for example).  From a scientific perspective, you (your memories, your consciousness, everything that makes you "you") are nothing but an arrangement of indistinguishable particles.  An object with precisely the same arrangement as you would be "you" in every measurable sense... not a "copy of you", but, in fact "you".

The passage of time, and the perception of "past", "future", and "now" are all illusions.  There's no way to be certain that any of your memories are real, or that you even existed a second before you read this.  Your consciousness is also an illusion, created by the manner in which you experience time.  If you were to cease existing in one place, and go on existing in another, there would be nothing to differentiate between the consciousnesses. Ergo, a teleported you would still be you.

The interesting extrapolation that can be made from this is that, if the "many worlds" conjecture is true, it's likely that you will never die (at least from your own perspective).  At any given moment, there is a finite possibility that you'll die, and a finite possibility that you will go on living.  This is true no matter how old you get. Therefore, since there exists at least one possible scenario (or universe, if you like) in which you live forever, you will continue to find yourself in it.
 
2013-02-03 04:10:48 PM  
I was thinking my opinion was only valid if the soul doesn't exist. A real soul might be able to go to different bodies, but since that doesn't exist if one brain is turned into nothing then why should the consciousness transfer to the new one?

I suppose there's so much about the brain we don't know that we might be able to identify that what we consider consciousness as a series of electical signals we can copy, and somehow have one person existing in two places, but it all starts to get a little bit hazy in my brain after that.

Z-clipped: Therefore, since there exists at least one possible scenario (or universe, if you like) in which you live forever, you will continue to find yourself in it.


When I was a kid I saw someone on a TV show say something similar, basically that you can play Russian Roulette all you like, you can't die. Your friends and family may see you die, but since you can't not exist you will always find a way to exist in an alternative world where the chamber was empty or the gun misfired.
 
2013-02-04 09:36:46 PM  

0Icky0: Z-clipped: Me.  My wife has Asian-time-warp, and will look 16 for the next 30 years, so she's already set.

I know what that's like.
And I like it.


Meh...by that time Z-clipped will be old and fat and she will be farking some other dude.
 
2013-02-04 10:13:35 PM  

Stone Meadow: 0Icky0: Z-clipped: Me.  My wife has Asian-time-warp, and will look 16 for the next 30 years, so she's already set.

I know what that's like.
And I like it.

Meh...by that time Z-clipped will be old and fat and she will be farking some other dude.


Women, more likely. But even if I got too old and fat to participate anymore, I'm sure she'd still let me watch. She's cool like that.
 
2013-02-04 10:23:21 PM  

Z-clipped: Stone Meadow: 0Icky0: Z-clipped: Me.  My wife has Asian-time-warp, and will look 16 for the next 30 years, so she's already set.

I know what that's like.
And I like it.

Meh...by that time Z-clipped will be old and fat and she will be farking some other dude.

Women, more likely. But even if I got too old and fat to participate anymore, I'm sure she'd still let me watch. She's cool like that.


Ah...a keeper. Why din't you say so? ;)
 
2013-02-04 10:44:28 PM  

Stone Meadow: Z-clipped: Stone Meadow: 0Icky0: Z-clipped: Me.  My wife has Asian-time-warp, and will look 16 for the next 30 years, so she's already set.

I know what that's like.
And I like it.

Meh...by that time Z-clipped will be old and fat and she will be farking some other dude.

Women, more likely. But even if I got too old and fat to participate anymore, I'm sure she'd still let me watch. She's cool like that.

Ah...a keeper. Why din't you say so? ;)


Holy shiat, is she ever. I'm a lucky guy. Either that, or it's cosmic payback for all of the crazy, lying, fickle, dishonourable, capricious biatches I had to wade through to get to her.

May both you and 0icky0 have the same good fortune.
 
Displayed 90 of 90 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report