Harvey Newstrom wrote:
>Now, to copy me, I assume that we have to read my thoughts and
>memories. My desires, memories, goals, etc., must not only be read and
>duplicated, but I think they must be decipherable and interpreted.
Just as a short copy program can copy all of Windows NT, it may be possible to perform an upload from a frozen brain without understanding the details of its operation. All that's required is a functional copy of the brain's essential structure, ie, neurons, synapses, hormones, etc. Making this copy is much simpler than understanding the structure's functioning, deciphering it or interpreting it.
>Now, suppose that I am cryogenically frozen and brought back in the
>future. They may have scanned my entire mind and recreated my thought
>processes into a new body for me. What about my family members who were
>not recorded, stored and recreated? They are gone and lost forever.
As a cryonicist this is a fact I must face - spiritually very similar to the issues brought up by the idea of reincarnation. Cryo can be seen as a techno form of reincarnation.
>But, I have memories of them. What they looked like, how they acted,
>what they said, how they lived. What if all the known data about a
>family member is also read out of my mind, and used to recreate that
>family member? It wouldn't be a true representation, but it would be a
>recreation of my perception of them. If the recreation looked the same,
>spoke the same, acted the same, generated the same kinds of reactions
>and conversations, I probably couldn't tell the difference. As far as I
>would know, that person would have been recreated.
Extracting these memories is a *difficult* problem. I think at best you
would end up with a simulation which like an actor, looks, talks, but
essentially isn't the person simulated. You might be convinced it is the
same, but the catch here is that any person I know has a *vast* amount of
information they use in their response to me, and this information is NOT
visible or accessible via my memories, as it resides in THEIR brain, not mine!
>To carry the idea further, what if they gather information about this
>person from many different people? <snip> It might even be able to
>synthesize data together and come up with conclusions about itself that
>nobody else knew, because none of us had the complete picture.
Interesting, yes. Complete, never.
>Any comments about this method of recreating people? It wouldn't meet
>my definition of survival. But it might be interesting to create a new
>person to replace a lost person.
Over the years there have been a number of science fiction stories on the theme of recreating historical persons and the results of same...I can't recall specific stories though, I guess my doppelganger forgot them....
O--------------------------------O | Hara Ra <firstname.lastname@example.org> | | Box 8334 Santa Cruz, CA 95061 | | | | Death is for animals; | | immortality for gods. | | Technology is the means by |