24 replies to this topic

[theimmortalist]

Do you have a favored type of immortality?

Biologically the same as you are now, heighten biologically, bio-robotic, full cyborg, computer awareness, or some other choice?

[Lazarus Long]

I am a broad spectrum immortalist as my current age ensures I must be more pragmatic. I would rather remain alert and participatory in the world around me than frozen so I would be willing to upload should that become possible in my life rather than depend on cryo.

If uploading becomes possible then full cybernetic transmutation will be too and I could exist comfortably that way and design my own adaptive upgrades. The biological imperative would be nice to return to someday if a means of improving the body (better immunity, stronger physical structure, heightened sensitivity, longevity, capacity for intelligence etc.) and were possible. To me the issue is less about my body per se and more about my mind and its perception and involvement with the world around.

[tous]

Im only in support for biological immortallity......maby with some technological hancements of the body...but never the mind. In my opinion you cant replace the mind without killing the person who was...If your concious were copied to a computer would it really be you or a copy of you?

[rahein]

I would do what ever I could to become immortal. I have no objections to uploading, or the like, so long as I keep my emotions and what makes me "me". If uploading could do that I think it would be an amazing experience, think of all of the minds interacting instantly in a vast network.

I think uploading is too far off to be considered a viable options in my "normal" lifespan, so I must achieve physical immortality first.

Cryo would be my last option before death.

[7000]

Tous, the biological and the uploading is still thesame.1 will definately lead to another if you wish.7000

[tous]

7000... How can you say that biological and uploading are the same....there very nature is totally condradictory of each other..... Stopping "You" .....my "You"that is..... from dieing... And making a "Copy of You" on a hardrive are completely different.... Atleast thats how I feel. I guess it depends on your definition of what "you" is... Is "you" simply an electrical wave on a biological contruct? Is "you" the brain and everything else between your ears? Or is "you" everything between from the tips of your toes to the ends of each strand of hair.

Now obviouslly I know your not talking about storeing someone on a hardrive...In that Im exagerating....But...

This seems off topic.... Has there been any threads so far on what "You" is...Im thinking im going to check and if not I beleave Ill start one....

[Infernity]

I can tell you I'd like to have mental immortality- cannot let *myself* vanish, and also physical immortality- our way to develop the mentality, I'd like to not die- not ever- don't want *me* to be forgotten and not be improving anymore, that would be a waste, no, it will be nothing...

~Infernity

[Matt]

Ok well I would like to be bio-robotic possibly, I would look to keep my conscious self. So meaning If at anytime It wasnt me then thats a nono.

Im looking at the possibilities with Nanotechnology and it does seem that there might be a time when we look Human just as we do now, but we are enhanced very much through the use of nanotech, chips and other.

When being bio-robotic is mentioned some people may get the image of some sort of 80's robot with all wires hanging out everywhere and just looking like a cyborg.

I do not see it like that, We will have the choice to remain and look fully human but everything about us will be enhanced, Our strength and Intelligence.

some people believe we will lose emotion and we wouldnt have " sex" and do all the other things. This is another false view I believe, Human emotion and feelings like love will be greatly increased in many ways.

First of all I will go for the diagnostic chips, to detect disease and problems so I can get them sorted months or even years before it becomes a problem, this will greatly improve my chances of reaching a time when radical life extension and augmentation becomes possible.

Hopefuly later on I would go for things like Respirocytes - http://www.foresight...spirocytes.html

The artificial red blood cell or "respirocyte" proposed here is a bloodborne spherical 1-micron diamondoid 1000-atm pressure vessel with active pumping powered by endogenous serum glucose, able to deliver 236 times more oxygen to the tissues per unit volume than natural red cells

By having these it will be possible to run without taking a breath... hold your breath under water for 4 hours at a time and more...

Genetic enhancements. I will wait untill I know these are safe, let the rich be the ginue pigs...

Last of all, which I assume wont be long after other enhancements. I will go for intelligence and upgrading my sensory inputs.

From there on, I dont know...

[Infernity]

...but never the mind. In my opinion you cant replace the mind without killing the person who was...If your concious were copied to a computer would it really be you or a copy of you?

Tous, the mind is what characterize you! In my opinion the mind is what meant to be preserved the most! what's the point of everything if your mind is being forotten?!

I believe you cannot replace the mind at all, not only without killing the person who was...! (oh well, at leat for now)

If your concious were copied to a computer- it will still never be you. It will only for a single moment, but from the moment you finished copying- you are changing, and changing alot! so it'll never be *you*. also- the fact you are not thinkning as twice person (I mean that you cannot be your copy while being yourself, and also not being only the copy) means you are still unique...

Yours
~Infernity

[Matt]

Well by uploading your brain to a computer then it would not be you. No, well it would... But it would be a copy of you. Meaning if you asked him/her questions then it would reply how you might have and it wouls swear that he/she was the real person and the one that is conscious.

So Consiousness lies within yourself, The descruction of your brain would result in you ( your consciousness ) dying and another consciousness living, ultimatly it wouldnt be you.

You should check out ray kurzweils paper on " law of acceleration returns " - http://www.kurzweila...tml?printable=1

It has some thoughts on Downloading the brain and some other stuff.

also check out his site at www.kurzweilai.net

Have fun :

[Infernity]

Well, it won't be the exact you because it has no the exact information- it knows everything till you finished uploading, and you are changing after it.

Also, the fact you are not able to be the copy, like to think like you are him, simply get into him and control the copy- it is not you...

I know it is quite hard to understand, like lots of things, but this is how it is.

~Infernity

[Matt]

Basicly you cannot transfer over you, your consciousness stays put in your biological brain.

This is why I could not accept something like descructive copying/scanning, because in the end, I never make it.

[Infernity]

What do you mean when you say "because in the end, I never make it"?
I don't understand why wouldn't you copy/scan yourself...
I think it would be awesome if someone could read me, could know evetything about me, well actually some specific people I'd really like them to know me, than they shall understand everything and I won't have to explain myself, I believe what I do is right, but I have to hide lots of things because I cannot explain it all, and without the full explanetion it won't be clear and will be "wrong" in their opinion...
Never mind... but I'd like to let few people know the fully me.

~Infernity

[Matt]

Of course I would copy/scan myself

Mabey you misunderstood what im trying to say. I dont know.. hehe

Under this situation i would not do it

"I could not accept something like descructive copying/scanning, because in the end my consciousness, my self could not be transfered without me being destroyed, what would exist is a copy of me... and he would live, not me.

Hey, Im confusing myself now

[Infernity]

whoa182,

my self could not be transfered without me being destroyed, what would exist is a copy of me... and he would live, not me.

What make you say so...?!
Or is it a part of your confusion?

Yours
~Infernity

[Matt]

Think of it as like the concept of teleportation, You have to destroy the object and then re-create in a different part of the room. I dont find the idea of destructive scanning very nice.


Unless you can prove me wrong of course, or convince me that this isnt the case [thumb]


Please read about " jack " first http://www.kurzweilt...response_13.htm

Edited by whoa182, 14 February 2005 - 09:29 AM.

[susmariosep]

Memory machine, the way to go.*

The inventor and computer scientist [Kurzweil] is serious about his health because if it fails him he might not live long enough to see humanity achieve immortality, a seismic development he predicts in his new book is no more than 20 years away.
(Article: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6959575/)

I wonder if Kurzweil has given his attention instead to the restoration of a person's self, instead of seeking to extend biological life indefinitely; because it would be more feasible to be able to come back to life, more appropriately for my purpose here, come back to existence, again and again than to be living indefinitely.

I am always thinking that human biological life in terms of what is peculiarly human distinct existence can be better cast in a machine form than in a biological system.

What is the distinct feature of the human entity? Not his biology, but his intelligent rationality.

This intelligent rationality can be realized today in a machine system with computer science.

But what of the self in the human entity? And what is the self?

Let us consider two concepts of self, the raw self or the generic self, and the self-identity which is the person in grammar known as the subject in a sentence, and it can be the first person, the second person, or the third person, singular or plural, thus: I, we; you; he, she, they; -- but not it for the present discussion, please, to save on our focus.

Wherefore I consider the concrete self as the identity of a particular human entity, like for example, Reason and Susma, two persons in this discussion forum: two selves, two identities, one is not the other.

What makes up the identity, therefore the concrete self?

Imagine a person who has lapsed into total irreversible amnesia, but otherwise biologically functional. He does not know himself anymore. For him his identity is gone, 'evanescented' for good.

By total irreversible amnesia, a person does not remember who he is and everything else about himself. This means that the memory database in his brain-mind of his identity is lost; insofar as he is himself concerned with himself, it does not exist anymore.

The condition is equivalent to all files in any way related to his identity in a computer harddisk, all lost, deleted.

For such a person, he is still aware of himself, so for him he still is a raw self, but no identity.

For others, he is a self with an identity; because they know who he is.

The identity is therefore the possession and augmentation and control and manipulation and fruition by a person of his memory database of the things about himself, making him distinct from and to other persons.

Let us imagine that such a person with total amnesia dies before people and he himself could do anything to start restoring the memory data of his identity into his brain-mind.

What can be done if anything at all to restore that human entity, which human entity, any one, we understand to be distinctively human owing to its intelligent rationality?

What else but rig up a memory machine, a computer, with all the memory data of his identity as we can gather from all kinds of extant records of the man, and from all our remembrances of him.

Is this memory machine, a computer, then possessed of an identity, in addition to a raw self that is the memory machine itself?

Yes, I submit.

This restored identity, say of Reason or Susma, this memory machine, this rigged up Reason or Susma, it or now a he, can continue to exchange messages in this message board. It is essentially human though not biological.

On this theory as I have described, we can restore Napoleon, Hitler, Einstein, Jesus, Buddha, and anyone who is now resting in peace in the cemetery. And we can create new and even more exotic human entities, without the defects and hazards of biological existence.

Susma

*Reproduced from the thread: live vote on (biological) immortality, interesting.

[Karomesis]

I am an equal opportunity employer so any method that would prvent the demise of my concious is permissible, although an ideal would be anything I wish, at anytime, on tap. Fully integrated transmuational capabilities. Of course we must once again return to The pleasure priciple, and conclude that whatever brings the most pleasure is always the preffered method to all concious beings. [lol]


The pleasure principle is relevant to any and all discussions revolving around immortalism, as it is, in my humble opinion, the surest path to unheard of bliss and pleasure a thousandfold more intense than any currently experienced. [thumb] Also, it is relevant to pauls sans cieling hypothesis, which is brilliant in its simplicity, as well as its implications for bliss and omnipotence, the logical conclusion to immortalism. [wis]

[Infernity]

Well whoa182,
I cannot practically prove you you are wrong, but I kind of disargee.
[>] "because in the end my consciousness" - - why should that happen?
for case it did:
[>] "my self could not be transfered without me being destroyed" - - why? making a *copy* doesn't mean *you* have to be destroyed... I don't understnad your outlook.
[>] "what would exist is a copy of me" - - true, but so will you, unless you will die, which you have no reason to......
[>] "and he would live, not me." - - simply not true.
so:
[>] "I could not accept something like descructive copying/scanning" - - why? (do you still think so), if you are- than why?
______________

You have to destroy the object and then re-create in a different part of the room

Maybe, but who said you wanna re-create? I mean you simply wanna have a copy, which is like you in the first moment (after the process completion you are changing and so you copy), you don't have to destroy yourself for letting your copy exist! like you don't have to throw away a spoon to buy a new one which is the same spoon (almost).

I also believe NOTHING have something which is exactly the same- even the elements in my opinion are not exactly the same, simple, it is not it, it is two elements, even if they are built the same they aren't the same thing, which means different (and I also believe they cannot be built from the exact same thing)...

Yours
~Infernity

Edited by infernity, 15 February 2005 - 02:29 AM.

[adbatstone]

My type of immortality is posthumanity. Don't mean to sound too extreme, but I dislike being human and suffering under the limitations of the conventional human body. The 21st Century looks too promising for progress to continue in a linear fashion, so I hope the Singularity rolls around soon enough. I suffer from autism and I'm sure that science could do something about that in the near future.

Edited by adbatstone, 17 February 2005 - 11:14 AM.

[Infernity]

I cannot see anything wrong with the human body adbatstone, maybe it is because you are not being pleased with yours (?) [huh]
I mean, of course we can improve it, and we are actually, but I think we have a pretty fine base! All we need- we are producing, we are always ameliorating...

Are you really suffering from autism?

Yours
~Infernity

[adbatstone]

Yes, I have Asperger Syndrome, an autism spectrum disorder.

Not that there's anything wrong with the human body, I'd prefer to be an augmented posthuman (retaining human characteristics, but with enhanced senses, greater mental power, etc).

[kevin]

adbatstone.. I've heard that Asperger's syndrome is more frequent among children of older fathers.... is this your situation?

[cosmicv]

Im for full tilt uploading... I think at some point the ability to move back and forth between bio and silicon substrates will be easy tech.

[27GV]

Immortality? Maybe. I'd prefer a computerized mind/biological body form, whereby the mind may be transfered from one body to another, hopefully with nano-bots and replacement organ technology to keep the single replacement body young and functioning for a long time.

I think the human body is perfect for what it is (not mine though :( long story there) and all I want is to be able to keep it at that state for as long as I feel I can contribute to the world. Once I feel at peace with myself and death, someone else could have my body and they could switch off my brain for an eternal rest.