CryoNet #32911 - #32913

CryoNet - Thu 7 Oct 2010

    #32911: Re: CryoNet #32905 - #32910 [Gerald Monroe]
    #32912: Jonathan Despres Rebirth in the US [Jonano]
    #32913: Re: Cruel World [Mike Perry]

Rate This Digest: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32911%2D32913

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 #32911
References: <[email protected]>
From: Gerald Monroe <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2010 04:17:47 -0500
Subject: Re: CryoNet #32905 - #32910

--00163628377468996a0491ef41c7

The arguments against uploading assume that we would need a perfect
simulation of the physics of the human brain in order for the uploaded
entity to be intelligent and a reasonable facsimile of the uploaded
personality.  Nothing could be farther from the case.

It's a common misconception that because neuroscientists don't understand
many things about the human brain, therefore they know nothing of relevance
to this question.  Actually, we do know that the human brain is incredibly
noisy.  Neurons are unreliable and operate just barely above the noise
threshold for the environment of the axons.  Synthetic  and natural
compounds act as contaminants and can change the firing properties of
neurons yet the brain continues to operate, albeit with reduced performance.


What this means is a good enough simulation would not have to be
particularly accurate with respect to the firing threshold of individual
neurons.  Most subtle effects could probably be ignored or approximated, and
the overall entity would still work.  Of course, your simulation would still
need to simulate 100 billion neurons with an average of 7000 synapses each,
which would require a mountain of hardware using today's tech.  And there's
a lot of other features : the brain absolutely has to have a body, or an
excellent simulation of one, or it will not activate at all.

But wait, you say, I don't want to be a "good enough" computer simulation
because that wouldn't be me.  Perhaps, but even a "good enough" simulation
where you are able to access most of your memories and have
super-intelligence is far better than death.

--00163628377468996a0491ef41c7

 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32911

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

Message #32912
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2010 19:11:24 +0200
Subject: Jonathan Despres Rebirth in the US
From: Jonano <[email protected]>

I will be living in america.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHqUipinDyw

Jonathan Despres rebirth in the US.

Optimism bias full !!!

--Jon

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32912

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

Message #32913
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2010 23:12:42 -0700
From: Mike Perry <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Cruel World
References: <[email protected]>

At 02:00 2010-10-06, Robert Ettinger  wrote:
>Message #32909
>From: [email protected]
>[...]
>It has been argued that, if uploading becomes possible,  and more generally
>the creation of virtual worlds, then there will be scads of  virtual worlds
>and any world chosen at random is almost sure to be a virtual  one.
>However, it seems likely that virtual worlds will tend to  be pleasant
>ones, since the programmers are unlikely to be sadists. Yet 
>the  world we see or
>whose past we infer is overwhelmingly a cruel one, built that way.

Our world does indeed seem to be built by accident, especially if you 
invoke anthropic selection, which says that the reason things are 
"just right" for our minimal needs is simply that we wouldn't be here 
to discuss the matter, if anything else had happened. With so much 
haphazard suffering, including creatures able to feel pain but not 
able to have moral responsibility like humans, the world seems 
clearly not to have been shaped by any intelligent design, or at 
least, not a particularly benevolent design, and in fact, a design, 
overall, with "neither malice nor mercy"--as Robert Ettinger himself 
has said. This would not square with the thought that most worlds 
should be virtual worlds created by benign advanced beings--we should 
find ourselves in one of these already. It doesn't follow, however, 
that advanced intelligent beings would go out of their way to create 
vast numbers of virtual worlds populated by beings such as ourselves 
who are far inferior and who don't appear to have any direct contact 
with more advanced beings than ourselves (despite some famous 
claims). They might have virtual worlds of a sort for themselves and 
those they would interact directly with only. I say "of a sort" 
because arguably an advanced being would not want to simply immerse 
itself in some illusory environment, but would probably want to 
maintain sensory links with an outside world.

Mike Perry

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32913

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

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