Stathis Papaioannou writes: > Yes; hence, everyone is immortal. But leaving that much-debated issue aside > for now, I'm not sure that I understand what, if anything, you would accept > as a method of surviving the death of your physical body. Would you consider > that scanning your brain at the moment of death and uploading your mind to a > computer constitutes survival? What about the Star Trek teleporter: is that > a method of transportation or of execution? If you can accept the > possibility that you can survive the death of your physical body at all, > then I think you have to accept that the people in my thought experiment are > *not* killed, despite the death of their physical bodies, just as in the > case of mind uploading or teleportation.
I guess I would say, I would survive death via anything that does not reduce my measure. If I am stopped here, I should be started over there, or back then, or when such-and-such happens. If my measure is conserved then I can be happy. If it can be increased, I will be that much happier. Both uploading and transporting conserve measure, so they are not death. Being killed and having only one in 10^100 of me continue does reduce my measure, so that is death, death on a scale that has never been seen before in the universe. (Compensated by birth on a scale that has never been seen before... So morally maybe it's not that bad. Still it's jerking people around to an amazing degree.) Hal Finney