Re: Uploading (Who is Who?)

Mike C. (
Wed, 26 Mar 1997 11:41:02 -0500

>From: Robert Schrader <>
>Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 14:27:59 -0800 (PST)
>Subject: Re: Uploading
>On Mon, 24 Mar 1997, John K Clark wrote:
>> (Mike C.) On Mon, 24 Mar 1997 Wrote:
>> >They [copies] would not be me.
>A would think it was A, B would think it was B.
>> A would think it was A, B would think it was A, both would be correct.
>In a sense both would be wrong, because 'A' doesn't mean the same
>thing anymore.

The new A thinks it is the new A.
The new B thinks it is the new B.

>Both are now faced with major problems.
>Which one of us is married?
>Who goes to work on Monday,

In my case the original probably does.
Of course neither are the same person that existed in that past,
but if I were the copy I would let the copied assume responsiblity
for the past, unless it was not so inclined to do so.

>and who pays the income tax on it?

My nationality does not require taxation.

>A is now so different from what A was before that it would
>be as much of a change as becoming person C with no duplicate.

Agreed, any change is as much change as needed to be a different person.

>It seems best to attempt to negotiate an
>immediate non-competition agreement with your duplicate

I have already agreed to that with my self.
A copy would agree as well, at least momentarily.
I would hope it would treat me with the same respect I treat my self.

>If seems also useful
>( if one's conscience permits ) to conspire to commit some profitable
>crimes, because of the new alibi possibilities.

What do you think actors are for? ;-)
Actually I do not commit crimes.
All I do is lawful,
as I have jurisdiction over my self
and legislate and execute laws freely.
It is impossible for me to break my law.
My law is the law of nature.