RE: duck me!

From: gts (gts_2000@yahoo.com)
Date: Fri Nov 08 2002 - 09:47:26 MST


Rafal wrote:

> ### Yes, you think you need constant backups
> because you define backups as constantly updated.
> Premises contain the conclusion, explicitly.

No, I am arguing that my backup should be continuously
updated for there to be a strong hope that it will
embody my sense of self upon its restoration. However
as I wrote to Lee I would also take advantage of a
delayed backup service, if only because I would see my
restored backup to be something like my progeny --
something like a surviving son is to a deceased
father, or a surviving younger brother is to a
deceased older brother. Maybe you don't like the word
"backup" when used for that purpose but I can't think
of a better word. It is in that sense that I speak of
"backups" that do not have my personality or sense of
self. I don't deny that they would have some value; I
deny only that they should be considered the person I
was when I died.

Imagine a computer program that constantly evolved
with each clock cycle while running on your computer
24/7. At each tick of your processor the program
changes slightly such that it would produce slightly
different outputs for a given set of inputs. One would
want to make a backup of that program at each clock
cycle (analogous here to planck time). If one did not
make continuous backups then the restored backup would
not be the same as the lost executable. The backup
executable would have a different personality and
non-nominal identity, so to speak, than the lost
exectuble file. I see human backups much the same way.

-gts

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
http://launch.yahoo.com/u2



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:01 MST