|
I'm new to this so I haven't read about all your people's different
theories. I've read quite a bit on transhumanist stuff, Aubrey DeGrey,
Freeman Dyson, ... it seems people are trying anything they can imagine,
and expanding into what they can't imagine, to look for immortality. Now
if continuous consciousness is not necessarily required for immortality, then
why are you waiting around for copying? Won't cloning come far
sooner? What is it about copying that is better than cloning. If
you, or one of your copies, went on a hyperwarp trip to a far away galaxy,
saw one of your copies, or one of your copies of a copy of a copy, a million
years from now on some strange planet, there's a good chance you probably
wouldn't like him/her and he/she wouldn't like you. Their behavior would
be strange and probably disgusting. So what's the big deal? What's
the difference between copying and having any intelligent life exist a million
years from now in the universe? Why not just have children, and pour our
lives into them? It's a lot easier, and we can do it now. I'm
seriously wanting to know.
|
- Re: Many Pasts? Not according to QM... Daddycaylor
- Re: Many Pasts? Not according to QM... Bruno Marchal
- Re: Many Pasts? Not according to QM... Stathis Papaioannou
- Re: Many Pasts? Not according to QM... daddycaylor
- RE: Many Pasts? Not according to QM... Jonathan Colvin
- Re: Many Pasts? Not according to QM... Jesse Mazer
- Re: Many Pasts? Not according to QM... Russell Standish
- Re: Many Pasts? Not according to QM... Jesse Mazer
- Re: Many Pasts? Not according to QM... Eugen Leitl
- Re: Many Pasts? Not according to QM... Eugen Leitl
- Re: Many Pasts? Not according to QM... Bruno Marchal

