[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kristin A. Ruhle)
>
>Do you know if it's the same one he published in F&SF magazine and used
>some of in Foundation's Fear? (discussing e.g. Levinson's Paradox, the
>fact that a copy is *not* the original and that uploading isn't really
>immortality which is something he intuits more readily than most people
>because he HAS a clone, er, identical twin brother.....)
What I find interesting is that in one statement he points out that we all
experience a loss of continuity of consciousness (sleeping), but then goes
on to suggest that uploading isn't as good as immortality.
In short, I respectfully disagree. His copy is based upon a much older
version of his state. It's as if saying, "we'll upload you, but then erase
the memories and personality of the copy until shortly the period shortly
after birth, and also send it backwards in time". That's not very useful
continuity.
Contrast that with the this scenario - "you go to sleep, and then we'll we
upload a copy of your current state and dispose of the body". Or this
alternative - "we'll slip into your house and kill you in your sleep". The
latter is disturbing, but I must admit I can't see how I'd care if it came
as a surprise, given that I wasn't conscious of it happening. The former
promises continuity which seems at least as good as that of the promise of
waking up when you go to sleep at night.
(A cruel experiment - kidnap someone in their sleep and let them wake up in
a room decorated like the Holodeck from Star Trek. Tell them that they're a
simulation recreated from the original and see what they think.)
Joshua
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
