Re: Who Should Live?

Gina Miller (
Tue, 16 Mar 1999 17:48:18 PST

I've made packs with others, regarding our return after cryonic freezing. Although I am young enough at this stage in technology that I may not have to even bother concerning myself with death. (in my nano-opinion) However, if it comes to that, I will take a higher percentage of a chance with cryo, than having none at all. Gina "Nanogirl" Miller

>J. R. Molloy wrote:
>> Furthermore, cryonics seems entropic in that it denies
>> that life may create even more talented and gifted people. Scientists
>> capable of reviving dead genius could create even greater genius, and
>> consequently would have no reason to perform resurrections.
>> After all, it makes no sense to rebuild a 1950 machine, when you can
>> a better and more powerful new one to replace and surpass the old one
>> 2050. Cryonics can only hope to revive talented and gifted people,
>> transhuman extropy seeks to surpass, exceed, augment, and transcend
what has
>> gone before, no matter how talented and gifted.
>Dear J.R. Molloy: I'm more talented and gifted than you are. Please
>shoot yourself.
>A sufficiently altruistic Extropian might decide that investing $100K
>Cycorp and/or Zyvex takes precedence over cryonic preservation.
>Consoling ourselves by saying cryonics isn't important is silly. It's
>not all-important. It might be unnecessary or undesirable. There
>exists a significant probability that it is important, necessary and
>Information must never be destroyed. It's a simple precaution.
> Eliezer S. Yudkowsky
>Disclaimer: Unless otherwise specified, I'm not telling you
>everything I think I know.

Get Your Private, Free Email at