okaterina
okaterina t1_ja4hn82 wrote
Reply to comment by DNMbeastly in An ICU coma patient costs $600 a day, how much will it cost to live in the digital world and keep the body alive here? by just-a-dreamer-
"Consciousness is not proven to be physical". What else ? If you start speaking about the immortal soul, I am out of this discussion (sorry, pure agnostic atheist here).
Now you speak of the mental state as tied to the physical state as time passes. But as Descartes said, "I think therefore I am", ie all input from the senses (sensory input) cannot be trusted. Why would you trust your eyes, do they really show you the truth ? What about visual illusions ?
What I am saying is that I do not need to be meat, I need to have the *exact* (and that is the point I am willing to discuss: would that ever be possible ?) processes. Is the brain a super-processor ? What's the part of randomness ? Can a neuron and axones be modelized with enough precision to reproduce a thought process ? And finally, is it needed to simulate neurones and axones to reproduce a thought process ? Is there a possibility to use another substrate, other mecanisms and get the same results ? Is it possible to feed it replica inputs, so it thinks it sees with its eyes, ears with its ears (and can touch the ears as touch is just another sense to duplicate/copy over) ?
I do not have the answer to the questions above.
BUT
If I have a *perfect* copy, therefore not discernable, it will be the same. Just as 1=1, the '1' on the left is not the '1' on the right, but they have the exact same properties and behavior in mathematics. You can use either of them.
Ask yourself: what is the difference between an original and a *perfect* copy ? If there is any difference, then the copy is not perfect.
okaterina t1_ja3ud13 wrote
Reply to comment by DNMbeastly in An ICU coma patient costs $600 a day, how much will it cost to live in the digital world and keep the body alive here? by just-a-dreamer-
Never "truly" ? Define truly then. Definitely not the sum of atoms (as you agreed).
What if the copy takes place in a few milliseconds - or during your sleep. The duplicates will both have a "continued conscious experience".
BTW, that's the physicalism philosofical theory - the substrate of consciousness does not matter.
okaterina t1_ja2ypke wrote
Reply to comment by DNMbeastly in An ICU coma patient costs $600 a day, how much will it cost to live in the digital world and keep the body alive here? by just-a-dreamer-
Does not matter if the duplicate has the exact same memories, thoughts schematics, perks and mannerisms. There is no difference between "to be some one"and perfectly pretending to be some one. Are you sure you are the same one than ten years ago, while you do not have a single atom in your body from that time ?
okaterina t1_jb4yx2g wrote
Reply to comment by Amerlis in TIL that the Convair Model 118, a tentative flying car from 1947, was shelved because its prototype crashed when a test pilot mixed up the flight engine's fuel gauge with the road engine's and didn't see the former run out. While he survived, this killed interest in the project. by ShabtaiBenOron
Never underestimate human stupidity.
Your fool-proof user interface still has one actionnable item ? It's not fool-proof enough.