CryoNet #32534 - #32541

CryoNet - Mon 5 Apr 2010

    #32534: we tried godlessness on a grand scale and the effects were de... [David Stodolsky]
    #32535: Re: Comments for Luke [David Stodolsky]
    #32536: "Does Old Age Bring Happiness or Despair?" [MARK PLUS]
    #32537: Survival is an illusion? [Brook Norton]
    #32538: Asimov, Clark etc. [RAMole]
    #32539: Alagebrium (Off Topic) [Olaf Henny]
    #32540: Arcturus comments [Ettinger]
    #32541: upload focus [Ettinger]

Rate This Digest: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32534%2D32541

Administrivia

To subscribe to CryoNet, send email to:
    [email protected]
with the subject line (not message _body_):
    subscribe
To unsubscribe, use the subject line:
    unsubscribe
To post a message to CryoNet, send your message to:
    [email protected]
from the same address to which you are aubscribed.
Send questions, comments, or feedback to [email protected]
with "CryoNet" or "cryonics" somewhere in the Subject line.

Since all CryoNet messages are archived and accessible via WWW,
including search engines, make certain that your postings
reflect how you want the world to see you.

To retrieve past messages, send email to:
    [email protected]
with the message numbers in the subject line.
(Message 0003 describes the advanced syntax.)
You also can retrieve them via the CryoNet web page at URL:
    http://www.cryonet.org/

For administrative or other questions/suggestions, send email
to me at "[email protected]" with "cryonics" in the subject line.
    - Kevin Q. Brown


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32534
From: David Stodolsky <[email protected]>
Subject: we tried godlessness on a grand scale and the effects were de...
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 11:05:07 +0200

http://www.smh.com.au/national/atheists-hit-back-at-clergy-criticism-of-nonbelief-20100402-rjmr.html

Atheists hit back at clergy criticism of non-belief

The new Catholic Bishop of Parramatta, in Sydney's west, Anthony  
Fisher, drew broader comparisons.
"Last century we tried godlessness on a grand scale and the effects  
were devastating: Nazism, Stalinism, Pol Pot-ery, mass murder,  
abortion and broken relationships - all promoted by state-imposed  
atheism," he said.


dss

David Stodolsky
[email protected]  Skype: davidstodolsky

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32534

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32535
From: David Stodolsky <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Comments for Luke
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 11:38:45 +0200
References: <[email protected]>

On 4 Apr 2010, at 11:00 AM, CryoNet wrote:

> The "instinct" of self preservation, for most people at most
> times in modern conditions, is conspicuous by its  absence.

According to one of the most successful psychological approaches  
today, terror management theory, this is erroneous. The 'instinct' is  
always present, but it is suppressed from awareness by cultural myths:

Pyszczynski, T., Greenberg, J. & Solomon, S. (1999).A Dual-Process  
Model of Defense Against Conscious and Unconscious Death-Related  
Thoughts. An Extension of Terror Management Theory. Psychological  
Review, 106, 835-845.

Pyszczynski, T., Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., Arndt, J., & Schimel, J.  
(2004). Why do people need self-esteem? A theoretical and empirical  
review. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 435-468.


dss


David Stodolsky
[email protected]  Skype: davidstodolsky

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32535

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32536
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 08:41:33 -0700
Subject: "Does Old Age Bring Happiness or Despair?"
From: MARK PLUS <[email protected]>

This would seem to falsify Peter Singer's utilitarian argument against
life extension:

http://www.livescience.com/culture/aging-happiness-100404.html

-- 
Mark Plus
Life is short: Freeze hard!

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32536

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32537
From: Brook Norton <[email protected]>
Subject: Survival is an illusion?
Date: April 2, 2010 8:42:18 AM PDT
References: <[email protected]>

As long-time survivalists, we often ask what we need to do so that "we" survive suspension, uploading, brain-matter-substitution, etc. As best I can tell, we don't ever really survive in a personal way such that "I" continue into the future. When a rock breaks in two, does "it" survive? When a lake totally freezes in winter and then melts in spring, does "it" survive. If the lake is drained and then refilled with different water, does "it" survive? In a human observer's mind, the lake may survive. Perhaps the lake is a favorite vacation spot, and the new water doesn't matter to the observer, so to that observer, the lake survives. The natural universe, however, doesn't care what we think, and doesn't care if "things" (rocks, lakes, people) survive or not.

"Survive" has various shades of meaning, and that makes all the difference in asking these questions. One could say a refilled lake "survives" but that is not what we as cryonicists are after. We want to know if some essential quality of an entity survives. As cryonicists, we can agree the lake does NOT survive in any way of interest to our survival because the lake lacks the essential quality of consciousness. But is consciousness the end-all quality that we must preserve? I don't think so. I don't think there is ANY essential quality that allows us to "survive" as we would like to, in an objective sense. Rather, what really matters is that we feel happiness now. That's all. For example, consider two people that undergo surgery where brain waves are absent for some period of time. Upon re
 covery, one says "I'm the same person because I'm conscious again and my memories are preserved." The other says "I'm a different person now. "I" did not survive because my consciousness was not continuous." Which is right? Neither. Because the question "did "I" survive" is meaningless. What happened is simply that they were conscious, they underwent surgery and lack of consciousness, and later became conscious again. That did happen, and no reference to "survival" is needed to describe what happened. Now, they could ask the legitimate question of "Am I happy after surgery?" And one could legitimately answer "yes, I'm happy because I feel like I survived" and the other could answer "no, because I'm sad I left my former self behind". Their reasoning is off, but their conclusion about thei
 r happiness is correct.

We often fall into the trap of envisioning survival scenarios (uploading, molecular brain repair, etc) and then asking ourselves, would I be comfortable with that type of survival. That's an illegitimate question because we can't survive, we can only reflect on what we think our state of happiness would be after the recovery event. Evolution has ingrained in us an illusion of personal survival. We feel happy if we envision our personal survival. This is because, those who prepare for a long (a few decades) life, will pass on their genes. So evolution favors those, and gives them happiness, for planning well to stay alive. Until we can reengineer the pleasure centers of the brain, we will have to play the game of planning for a long life in order to feel happy now. I personally am enrolled 
 in cryonics because planning for that, makes me happy now. I go along with the survival illusion because my genetics makes me feel good when I do. But the intellectual part of me sees the game. I also want cryonics to be successful in case the above paragraphs end up having a fallacy and my reasoning is off track. I'd like a second chance to change my mind.

Brook Norton

 Content-type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32537

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32538
From: [email protected]
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 18:10:09 EDT
Subject: Asimov, Clark etc.

It seems we have sporadically sent letters to a few famous people. It would 
 be better to organize the effort.
 
We should compile a list of living famous science fiction writers,  
technologists (Gates, Jobs, Ellison, Elon Musk) and others who might be  
interested, and send out standard letters about cryonics. We might try several  
letters to see which one is most effective. Postage is cheap and email is free,  
and with hundreds of letters we should get some responses. Even a few willing 
to  endorse cryonics and sign up would give us good publicity.
 
Or has this been tried?
 
Alan Mole


 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32538

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32539
From: "Olaf Henny" <[email protected]>
Subject: Alagebrium (Off Topic)
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 17:12:26 -0700

Hi:

It has been years, since I last posted on Cryonet, thus I hope, that I am doing this right.

Thanks for correcting me,

Olaf



Since as a Canadian I was unable to guarantee compensation to a cryonic service provider, while still receiving the income the funds in question generate, I have for the time being given up on cryonics and concentrated on life extension instead.

 

By combining nano-resveratrol with water extracted cinnamon, l-argenine and exercise, I have managed to attain a more athletic physique, than I thought possible at my age, over the last year or so.

 

Unfortunately this physique is covered with 75 year old skin, ruining the image :).  Therefore I wondered, what has happened with Alt 711 and entered "alagebrium' into the Google News search programme and was surprised to see this pop up:

 

http://news.google.com/news/search?aq=f&cf=all&ned=ca&hl=en&q=alagebrium 

 

Guessing from the characteristics of the faces in the group photo, that the text was Korean, I entered it into http://translate.google.com and ended up with the following rather spotty computer translations:

 

1.)    [Kyungpook National News] 10000000000000000 shares sold Expo Park discount packages
Daily News - Mar 30, 2010
The Professor 'alragebeurium in an animal model of chronic peritoneal dialysis (Alagebrium) Reviews by glycosylation products in peritoneal degradation effect on the academic paper, received the award represents. ...
"The race expo on vacation this summer is the best" in the Daily
10000000000000000 weeks and enjoy the joy of summer travel sinmenyuro twice! Asia News Agency

Contribute a better translation

 

 

2)      HO Dongguk University professor, e " Academic Association
Daegu Ilbo - Mar 30, 2010
... There can not affect the exposed limits, "said," but recently developed 'alagebrium', applied in an animal model of peritoneal dialysis patients achieved successful results in research, ...
Professor HO Kyungpook National Academic Awards in the Social Chapter 1 Oh

 

Since the first article mentions glycosylation, we are obviously not with some coincidental language play, but with the real alagebrium, which is obviously still alive in some form.

 

Can anybody shed more light on this?

Thanks,

Olaf

PS: I subsequently also entered alagebrium into the Google websearch and found the formula for it announced on Wikipedia together witha release of all right to public domain by the holder of the copyright.  This tells me, that all I have written above is probably stale news to everybody in this forum, but I would appreciate, if anybody could tell me, if alagebrium is available and what the experience has been with it


 Content-Type: text/html;

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32539

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32540
From: [email protected]
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 21:32:32 EDT
Subject: Arcturus comments

2Arcturus' remarks below have some problems.
 
>Since the mind is not defined materially, it does not make  sense to 
regard this as a copy. The mind that >resumed would be the same  mind, just 
supported by a different substrate, in different  circumstances
 
Mental activity is material, like all other activity. A simulation is  
indeed an attempted copy. To say it is the "same mind" supported by a different  
substrate is to buy the information paradigm, which is only a mantra.
 
Also, it is not true that enhancement of our brains requires uploading. All 
 the powers of a computer could be attached to or incorporated into the 
organic  brain--the computer can be an extension of the person, or a tool of 
the person,  not a replacement. 
 
I may try another focus message.
 
Robert Ettinger
 
 
In a message dated 4/4/2010 5:00:36 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
[email protected] writes:


Message #32532
References:  <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010  11:31:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: 2Arcturus  <[email protected]>
Subject: Thought experiment  &  survival

--0-1437903262-1270319507=:58810

In trying to do a  thought experiment about whole brain emulation, it's 
taking a wrong turn to  imagine yourself as you are now alongside the 
emulation. If it were done for  the purpose of survival, then by that condition, your 
current mind would no  longer be continued, and so in a sense, it would not 
exist -- for example, the  mindlessness of cryopreservation, deeper than 
any coma or other kind of  unconsciousness. So the proper way to do the 
thought experiment would be to  compare the emulation to the continuation of the 
body you have now, which  would have no active mind. 

Ideally, the emulation would support the  entire process of your embodied 
mind, resuming from the point where it left  off in your present body. Since 
the mind is not defined materially, it does  not make sense to regard this 
as a copy. The mind that resumed would be the  same mind, just supported by a 
different substrate, in different  circumstances, and it would be the only 
such mind in existence, if it were  done for the purposes of survival. Yes, 
emulation raises the possibility of  copying, as well as merging, splitting, 
enhancement, and a million other  possibilities, but for the purposes of a 
thought experiment about survival,  copying is not the issue. So then, if 
you imagine what it would feel like to  be this emulation, by definition, it 
would have to feel exactly the same as  you would feel, if you were to find 
yourself in that circumstance, except for  your body (although if that were 
identical also, you would feel no difference  in your embodiment,
either).

As we all know, cryonics is only a  partial solution to the problem of 
death, not a complete solution. There are  innumerable ways the brain can be 
destroyed, for example, in an explosion or  fire, or by a neurodegenerative 
disease, or crushed beyond the ability of any  computation or scaled technology 
to reconstruct. Those of us who are  transhumanist are also dedicated to 
enhancing the mind in an unlimited  direction, which would not really be 
possible if were to remain bound by the  constraints of the organic brain's 
biochemical processes. Maybe other  alternatives will be found in the future, but 
for now, brain emulation and  emulation on more flexible substrates offer 
the only hope for a comprehensive  solution to the danger of death and 
unlimited advancement of the human  mind.






 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32540

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32541
From: [email protected]
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 22:20:03 EDT
Subject: upload focus

Whether any of this is worth the time and effort remains 
doubtful, but I keep hoping I can find some slightly
different arrangement of words that will clarify some
issues and get past the mantras of the uploaders.
 
One succinct way to express one of the basic 
uploading flaws is the reminder that "The map
is not the territory." A problem here is that the
warning is not universally justified, since sometimes
the map can be regarded as the territory--as a clear
example, when the "territory" is itself a map. If I
have a good map of a city at some level--maybe
showing streets, parks, and important buildings--
then, say, a decent photo of the map would for
all practical purposes be as useful as the map
and could be said to "be" an instantiation of
the map. But such cases are relatively few and
unimportant. We are concerned primarily with
simulation of a person in a digital computer, and
I claim this can never be the person--that it is
impossible that you will ever "wake up" as a
computer program. No just unlikely, but flat
out impossible in principle.
 
The reason is just that a description or 
representation of a thing is never the
thing (with the exception of the map
and the like). A simulation of a person in
a digital computer is just a state of the
computer, or succession of states, each
state being  just a collection of numbers
or symbols  which COULD be interpreted
to convey meaning to someone who knows
the code. In the case of Turing's universal
paper tape computer, a state of the computer 
means just the set of marks in the squares of 
the tape at a given moment. 
 
Yes, I know what the main response to this
will be. The mantra will be repeated, only
louder. ("Only your pattern is important!")
Well, somewhere in the  multiverse (or
in many places and times) your pattern
doubtless exists (or many of them). Feel  
nice and snug? 
 
CAUTION--I am NOT saying that a computer
program could not be conscious, although
it probably could not. I am just saying that
YOU could not be such a program.
 
Robert Ettinger
 


 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32541

----------------------------------------------------------------------

End of CryoNet Digest
*********************