16 thoughts on “Brave New Future”

  2. If functionalism is true, like many cognitive scientists and philosophers correctly believe, . . .

    Who’s writing this, God? Or just someone from the future?

  3. I’m still reading the article, but I keep scrolling back to the second illustration to gawk at it. I keep wondering how those skyscrapers survive the mighty tidal effects of that close-in moon. Heck, I wonder how that moon survives at all – it has got to be inwards of the roche limit.

  5. But make sure you upload yourself to something that supports consciousness…

    Yeah, I hate when that happens. Though there’s really no way to know for sure until you try. You have to take other peoples’ word for it (just like now)…

  6. I dunno. Part of me feels intrinsically connected with the physicality of my brain. I accept that computer copies will most likely be possible one day, but feel like a copy of that would be just that – a copy. Not me. Especially if we both continue on. Sure, it’s nice for him to get all those mentioned benefits, but I’m not him.

    Secondly though, I don’t think it’s going to happen. Simulating a brain in silicon would have to be much less efficient than running an AI program coded to the metal. And that AI will be fundamentally different from us. Not necessarily bad or evil, but necessarily different. Again, not me.

  7. I don’t think “conservatives” will automatically hate this, so much as Luddites will. Left luddites who think technology is evil, and Right luddites who believe in an immaterial soul.

    Conservatives like me, atheistic, materialist conservatives (no, it’s not a contradiction in terms:-), won’t have any problem with it.

  8. I’ve thought a lot about this:

    1) After you are uploaded, you are completely at the mercy of whoever is not uploaded. You are the slave, they are the masters.

    2) If you can get around #1 somehow, you can create a new infinite universe inside your computer. Ie: each year you optimize the code/hardware enough that you add more than 1 year to the life of the universe. In other words, you can cheat the universe’s cold death problem. Similarly, you can deal with infinite variety by memory and run-time compression.

    3) You can even allow people to create new universe machines inside your own – theirs just run slower. Then if they come up with a clever optimization, back port it to yours.

    4) There would probably be a problem with raising children in this environment – I believe that various things that make us human (and prevent us all from being liberals) would be unlikely in such an environment. So we would likely make a world for our children, modeled after the world we used to live on, Earth. We’d let them grow up there – we would know that they were never in any real danger (they are already uploaded, after all), but they would be able to experience the fear and danger of life enough to not be douchbags to each other when they join us in eternal life. (Of course we would include the dinosaurs – Earth had them, after all.)

    We would also probably give them some guidance, but directly into their minds – a conscience, if you will. Plausible deniability and all that, they need to believe they are on their own occasionally. But guidance should be given only if they want it – if they don’t ask, then let them choose their own way. After all, it’s just a simulation.

    Or something like that…

  9. When clockwork machines were the cutting edge of technolgy, the universe was a clockwork. Now it’s a computer. Plus ça change.

    Consciousness as an epiphenomenon of matter? Sez who?

  11. I think I’d settle for using the upload as an archive, and maybe get some additional processing power. The problem with retreating permanently into the matrix is that there are no more surprises — everything that happens is by choice rather than chance.

  12. If uploading is possible, I would think the luddites would be in favor of it. It means they can get rid of all of those pesky people who do not share their world-view so that they would have the physical world left to themselves.

    Of course, we know that the luddites are not just about being able to live life their own way. Having the option to live life different from their choices is somehow intolerable to them.

    I would also like to modify the definition of luddite. Someone who chooses to live a non-technological simply life is not necessarily a luddite. A luddite is specifically someone who does not want technology in their life AND believes that they have the right to force their personal beliefs and choices onto others who may not share them.

  15. Mind uploading… what a worthless concept. Now mind downloading… that is something.

    I have little interest in being trapped inside a machine with the same people for a zillion years.

Comments are closed.