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

Reply via email to