From: Hubert Mania (humania@t-online.de)
Date: Thu Sep 05 2002 - 04:18:21 MDT
I wondered:
> > When the discussion on this
> > list comes to distributed copies or backups I always wonder what the exact
> > condition of such a backup is...
And Anders answered
> To make backups of you requires *at least* a complete scan of your brain,
> the ability to store this and create an equivalent system, which means
> technology on the uploading level. I think most people just think of the
> backup as an information archive which can be downloaded into a prepared
> robot body which immediately starts to run your mind emulation; it could also
> be a more detailled body blueprint for recreating the entire body. This body
> could of course be anything from a nanoreplica of your original fleshbody
> (assuming that is your original) to something entirely artificial.
That was the clarification I needed, Anders. Thanks a lot. Now all the follwing problems
in this scenario disappear
> Why not just simple non-sentient software? Your exoself could be a script
> like:
>
> Sleep 24 hours
> Check mailbox
> If message from original present then
> if authentic sleep message then
> Restart
> Activate stored copy
>
> (It can be elaborated in fun ways to deal with forged messages, levels of
> alert, emergencies etc)
Yeah, I can see a great comic potential, too. That`s for sure. Now that the basic
problems of understanding what the hell our copies really look like, is solved, one
might treat the "Nobody's Robody" scenario with less respect, invent minor black humor
calamities and make fun of our own future self executors. Might be great to wake up one
or all of them and have an online chat where you can feed them the latest news.
> If you trust the hardware and software to store the backup and revive it,
> then the rest is no problem. If you can't trust the components, then you will
> only be happy once you have built *everything* from scratch (including your
> get-back-to-earth spacecraft).
No, that`s too fancy. I actually have no problems to rely on people in real life. But it
came as a shock to me, when I imagined being dead and realized I would be absolutly
unable to control the activation of one of my copies.
> > why I was wondering if all our fine ideas about living forever must
> > finally rely on this little manual help from a friend or a paid
> > institution. And if there actually is no way to do it ALL by yourself.
>
> I think Robin Hanson made a good point in his "Dreams of Autarchy" paper,
> where he pointed out that the ideas of being *totally* independent that
> often circulate on this list are rather impractical.
Of course, life as we live it now is defined by my relations to other human beings. No
one can be a solipsist without getting seriously in trouble, I think. My scenario was
invented for the sake of theoretically restricting the movements of other hands than
mine to a minimum. Thanx for your help.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:16:43 MST