CryoNet #32843 - #32846

CryoNet - Tue 21 Sep 2010

    #32843: AW: CryoNet #32842 [Jens Rabis]
    #32844: Regarding R. Ettinger's Latest Messages [robomoon]
    #32845: Arizona 2200 [Jonano]
    #32846: Identity is as Identity Does [Brian Wowk]

Rate This Digest: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32843%2D32846

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.


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

Message #32843
From: "Jens Rabis" <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
Subject: AW: CryoNet #32842
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 11:25:38 +0200

Dear cryofather Robert, 

I hope that after our resurrection come to quarrel: Who is as an
ex-individual really resurrected? The biological, biomechanical, mechanical
or Uploader. Or the mixture of all states. That would mean ... that the
Cryonic was successful *grin*
Important question is: Is there a written last will, such as cryo-customers,
cryo-friends, cryo-family members want to resurrect?!

Your Cryoson Jens


*****************

Lieber Cryovater, 

ich hoffe dass es nach unserer aller Wiederauferstehung zu einem Streit
kommen wird. 
Wer ist wirklich als Ex-Individuum wiederauferstanden? Die Biologischen, die
biomechanischen, die mechanischen oder Uploader. Oder die Mischung aus allen
Zustanden.
Das wurde bedeuten, dass die Cryonic erfolgreich war *0grinst*
Wichtige Frage dazu: Gibt es einen schriftlichen letzten Willen, wie
Kryo-Kunden, Kryo-Freunde, Kryo-Familienmitglieder wieder auferstehen
wollen?!

Dein Cryosohn Jens
Germany-Berlin






-----Ursprungliche Nachricht-----
Von: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Im
Auftrag von CryoNet
Gesendet: Montag, 20. September 2010 11:00
An: [email protected]
Betreff: CryoNet #32842

CryoNet - Mon 20 Sep 2010

    #32842: The Soul as Code [Ettinger]

Rate This Digest: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32842%2D32842

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 #32842
From: [email protected]
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2010 23:15:28 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: The Soul as Code

Mark Gubrud, U. of Maryland, has a piece in The New Atlantis on  why 
transhumanism won't work, including why uploading won't work
 
I  wasn't terribly impressed with his approach, but it reminded me  that 
what uploaders are saying, in slightly different language, is that while
the 
word "soul" is taboo, you can use words like "pattern identity" which  
essentially mean pretty much the same thing. They claim your essence is a  
pattern, which can be instantiated as a computer code. (They conveniently  
overlook the continuity and long term implications.)
 
Well. not many people today use the word "ontology" in connection with  
their pet subjects, but the notion of uploading is at base a question in  
ontology. What does it mean to be, to exist? The latest fashion holds that  
nothing exists, or everything exists, since information is everything, and  
information, or potential information, is  everywhere and  indestructible.
 
Oddly enough, I agree that probably there is a law of conservation of  
information--at least, that it cannot be destroyed, even if it can be
created.  
On a practical level, it means that there is some chance of recovering all 
your  personal information eventually, even if your brain is incinerated. 
But, as  they say, don't hold your breath.
 
So far, Platonism is holding on fairly well. Most people believe that math, 
 for example, is discovered, not invented. But this is probably just 
dancing,  since anything "invented" had to be there already, at least
potentially.
 
To many all this seems like mental masturbation, but it does have practical 
 implications, such as whether or not you should pay the price for  
cryonics.
 
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=32842


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

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32843

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

Message #32844
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 12:43:50 +0200 (CEST)
From: [email protected]
Subject: Regarding R. Ettinger's Latest Messages
References: <[email protected]>

Most wealthy and sufficiently intelligent investors should add neuronal tissue preservation to their portfolios. But families with low income or some low educational potential have no metrics to implicate payments for the actual price of cryonics. So far, the dumb idea of reincarnation will remain a smart idea for psychotherapy.

Message #32842 by Robert Ettinger started with: Mark Gubrud, U. of Maryland, has a piece in The New Atlantis on why transhumanism won't work, including why uploading ... Message ended: ... but it does have practical implications, such as whether or not you should pay the price for cryonics.

Message #32836 by Robert Ettinger, extractions: [T]oo many cryonicists see themselves just as customers rather than partners or family. [H]einlein believed in reincarnation, which is surely in the running for one of the dumbest ideas of all time.


Heute erleben, was morgen Trend wird - das kann man auf der IFA in Berlin. Oder auf arcor.de: Wir stellen Ihnen die wichtigsten News, Trends und Gadgets der IFA vor. Naturlich mit dabei: das brandneue IPTV-Angebot von Vodafone! Alles rund um die Internationale Funkausstellung in Berlin finden Sie hier: http://www.arcor.de/rd/footer.ifa2010

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32844

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

Message #32845
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 02:35:40 +0200
Subject: Arizona 2200
From: Jonano <[email protected]>

Hi,

I declare this: If the Arizonian economy do not revive Alcor Patients
before the important year of 2200, Arizonian people will be considered
as lazy and slow.

--Jon

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32845

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

Message #32846
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 00:23:03 -0700
Subject: Identity is as Identity Does
From: Brian Wowk <[email protected]>

I read with interest Bob Ettinger's recent remarks about Mark Gubrud's
piece in The New Atlantis.

http://futurisms.thenewatlantis.com/2010/06/why-transhumanism-wont-work.html

Although I have not been around as long Bob, I have nevertheless
observed arguments about uploading, identity duplication, and related
subjects for decades.  In all that time there are two things I've
never seen: (a) A truly new argument, and (b) Someone change their
mind.  What is seen are people who passionately believe they are
correct, and who believe that they have just the argument to finally
convince the other side that they are right.  They never do.

I have come to believe that the question of whether a computationally
equivalent duplicate of a human mind (assuming equivalence in this
context is even definable) constitutes a continuation of the original
person may be objectively unanswerable.  It's almost a matter of
taste, like alternative interpretations of quantum mechanics that
assume different underlying realities that give exactly the same
measurable results.

Eventually the distant day will come when the computational processes
of a human brain are duplicated in an electronic computer, or even in
another identical organic substrate.  When that day comes, we can be
certain of this: If the person who was "duplicated" believed before
duplication that duplication constitutes survival of the self, then,
by definition, the duplicated entity will insist vociferously that
indeed they did survive.  This has ethical implications.  Conversely,
an entity derived from a person who did not believe in this form of
survival might be quite unhappy to be told that they were the product
of a destructive scan of somebody.  This too has ethical implications.

Philosophical truth aside, evolution selects against humans who spend
time worrying about whether sleep, anesthesia, or biostasis endangers
personal identity.  Similarly, it is easy to predict which side of the
uploading and duplication debates will win in the long term.  There is
no entity more invulnerable or fecund than one that believes it
consists of information.

---Brian Wowk

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32846

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

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