On 6/26/07, Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 06:37:23PM +0300, Kaj Sotala wrote:
> "Killing" is an interesting word, with several interpretations. In a
Perhaps we can agree on a permanently terminated system trajectory.
You can make sure it never gets resumed by erasing the information
about the original process. Save of lunatic fringe (at the big
Sounds workable.
> sense, it's true that you need to "kill" the original - the original
> certainly isn't exactly the same after being uploaded, in the same
With destructive scan, there is no original. It takes reassembly
of nanosalami slices of a vitrified biological system.
Of course, there are methods of uploading that do destroy the
original. I was only pointing out that the destruction of the original
isn't a necessary requirement for *every* method.
> stuck on the viewpoint where the only method of uploading is making a
> copy and then destroying the original, when the prospect of gradually
> turning your neurons into artificial ones has already been brought up
It's a great prospect. Unfortunately, I don't see how we currently
living can profit from systems as described in http://nanomedicine.com/
If you're a chunk of cryogenic glass in the dewar the destructive
scan is easiest.
Easiest, perhaps. I wonder if people entering cryogenic suspension
could set some sort of "thaw-out conditions" - for instance, "only
bring me back if you can rebuild my original cell tissue, no matter
how long it takes" or "bring me back at the earliest opportunity, even
if you had to do a destructive upload".
--
http://www.saunalahti.fi/~tspro1/ | http://xuenay.livejournal.com/
Organizations worth your time:
http://www.singinst.org/ | http://www.crnano.org/ | http://lifeboat.com/
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=4007604&user_secret=7d7fb4d8
