Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

benadrylpill t1_j9xykr7 wrote

This may sound harsh, but I think it's pretty arrogant of anyone to think they're important enough to "live" forever.

−1

DJ2x t1_j9yy3oq wrote

But why? I suppose it could come off as arrogant to continue consuming resources beyond the current average lifecycle if those resources are harmful or nonrenewable.

On the other hand, if your immortality cost was simply energy (that can be harnessed in multiple renewable ways) what harm could come from it? The potential for larger collective thought and minimized loss of information is very appealing to me. There is also the possibility that once you're data, you can be modified or 'upgraded' essentially merging humanity with the AI we're currently creating.

Now, I understand there is LOADS of moral, ethical, and technical questions that are far beyond my ability to solve myself. I just think there is a way it can result in advancement instead of replacement.

1