RE: Duplicates are Selves

From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Sat Apr 05 2003 - 14:32:24 MST

  • Next message: Eliezer S. Yudkowsky: "Re: Duplicates are Selves"

    On Sat, 5 Apr 2003, Hal Finney wrote:

    > Harvey writes:
    >
    > So we have two scenarios:
    >
    > 1A: Do a duplication and leave the original intact
    > 1B: Do a duplication and destroy the original

    1A is approximately possible using nanobot sensing at
    the cellular/atomic level -- I'm not sure that you
    can make it perfect.

    1B is probably possible with a destructive readout of
    the state of a cryonically suspended individual.

    Not proposed is 1C -- in which you may do a destructive
    readout but at the same time reassemble the original.

    > What about these two scenarios:
    >
    > 2A: Do a duplication and leave the original intact

    This seems surprisingly close to 1A done with the nanobots.

    > 2B: Don't do a duplication, just leave the original alone

    Then you are dead, dead, dead. Do nothing to develop a
    distributed replicated intelligence and eventually your
    hazard function catches up with you.

    Now, as I think Harvey pointed out there are some creative
    approaches to this that involve a gradual evolution and perhaps
    distribution of your intelligence that would not involve
    outright copying. So teleportation and immortality are not
    "strongly" linked -- but one has to be very clever about it.

    > But I've never heard anyone expressing a sort of
    > "duplication imperative", a feeling that any missed opportunity to
    > duplicate would be as bad as destructive duplication.

    I would assert that non-duplication is much worse than destructive
    duplication. Individuals are information containers -- potentially this
    information (their experiences) might save future human lives (and their
    information). It seems likely that *if* this information is preserved in
    some way that in the future that we will develop the methods to read-out
    and distribute this information so that others may benefit from it.

    To allow the destruction of information that might be of benefit
    is certainly unextropic and perhaps immoral.

    If the only option is "destructive duplication" then I would consider
    it highly responsible for all extropians to consider it as an option.

    Robert



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Apr 05 2003 - 14:44:08 MST