From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Fri Dec 13 2002 - 16:39:25 MST
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Damien Broderick, responding to my post wrote:
> Whoa, not so fast, bucko. Assuming I'm the Damien in question,
Are you suggesting that we have two or three of you on the list?
If so, then you are way ahead of the rest of us with respect to
distributing copies.
> all I've ever
> said is that personal identity is more or less continuous and bounded. We
> each have/am an `I' that isn't a unitary identity atom (like a medieval
> angel) but a composite construct in ceaseless dancing action--
Damien, you can assemble the words with much more flourish than I
(sometimes I wish you would just "stick to the facts"). But at
any rate if one is distributed over a large enough distance the
concept of "continuous and bounded" starts to become a bit iffy.
How often does you left hand not know what your right hand is doing?
> so in a sense we're *already* distributed.
Yes, but not sufficiently so to avoid point-source failures
(earthquakes, heart attacks, asteroid strikes, etc.)
> Once you can add external modules to provide
> redundant backup in light-speed-realtime two-way contact with your basic
> identity-node, all's well for the extended being, more or less. The self
> might lose some memories when the Centaurian Ugh take out a node or two with
> a relativistic bomb, but then memory is always volatile.
Agreed.
> The flame is distributed and replicated. But then, the dance of the
> flame has no inner life. It doesn't *care* if any particular torch goes out.
Oh, now you are going all romantic on me. If Damien is distributed across
the entire solar system such that it takes him an hour to respond to my
communications, then I'm probably getting much better response time than
the current ExI list. Now, if on the other hand there are multiple copies
of Damien distributed all around the solar system then it gets pretty
interesting when I get a dozen replies over a couple of days with similar
but somewhat different contents. It raises an interesting question (perhaps
similar to what may go on in our minds currently) of who gets to be the
"Speaker" for Damien. What part of your brain gets to control the words
that you speak (or type???).
> *We* would, from the inside here, if we were conscious flames; we'd resent
> it bitterly, in our last dying moments.
This may be the fundamental point where you and I differ in our opinions.
(Which is what gives rise to the opportunity for provocative discussion.)
> But if all we're after is any Robert the rest of the world can relate to, we
> can *do* that. We have the technology. Well, eventually.
Agreed. But it will require uploading and mind "dispersal". Some people
may not wish to go through that process (esp. if it makes one less intelligent
as I have suggested). It raises some interesting questions of how good
ones "intelligence" is that one could remain "concentrated" for much of
the time but then disperse when the hazard function increases. It raises
the question of whether mind "dispersal" could place a fundamental limit
on longevity because you would reduce your intelligence below that necessary
to predict ones hazard function with sufficient reliability.
I think this is a novel concept as I haven't encountered it in any of
the aging/longevity literature previously. It raises an interesting question,
"How smart do you have to be to live forever?" (within the bounds allowed
by the structure of the universe).
> Nah, I think we're all safe from the John Grigg short term hazard function.
> :)
>
> (Sorry, John, I couldn't help myself--the devil made me do it.)
Less so than you might think. I've got pictures upstairs that John sent
me of him hiking around in the Grand Canyon. (Many many years ago in my
teenage days I hiked across the Grand Canyon, so I'm familiar with the
trek.) One has to ask given the "vitality" of extropians, what is the
probability that they might get together and go on such a hiking trip,
then what is the probability that someone might slip and fall and end
up possibly on top of oneself (causing some injury), then the probability
of being rescued from such a remote location in time to receive proper
medical attention?
In a non-uploaded, non-distributed state I think our odds at more
than a few thousand years are quite grim (unless we develop the
technologies to deal with this). I do not think there are many
people thinking about these problems at this time so the prospects
do not seem good to me at this time.
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:43 MST