3 ms·

If you copy your brain digitally and let that run while you yourself die, there's no benefit to yourself. You still die. No, you don't die. https://en.wikiped

If you copy your brain digitally and let that run while you yourself die, there's no benefit to yourself. You still die. No, you don't die. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information-theoretic_death https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information-theoretic_death explains why. > You don't get to experience longevity. What would live on is a copy of yourself that believes itself to be the same person as you were. Your yourself would have no continuity of thought. Do you have continuity of thought before and after you undergo general anesthesia?

CountSessine 10y ago
Do you have continuity of thought before and after you undergo general anesthesia? Perhaps, perhaps not - but it does remove any uncertainty, doesn't it? At least with general anesthesia we can say that there is continuity of process and form; with 'digital afterlife', we don't even have that - you've been extinguished and your electronic doppleganger lives happily ever after. 'Digital afterlife' resolves any epistemelogical ambiguity but not in a happy way - it isn't you - we know that. Seems like a pretty lousy afterlife. I'd rather just be remembered.
- zyxley 10y ago
  If the options were "die" and "die, but with an immortal digital copy", I think I'd still take the second. It wouldn't help me much personally, but zyxley-2 would be able to carry my legacy forward and (hopefully) lessen the burden of grief on others.
  - civilian 10y ago
    Might it increase the burden of grief on others? I had a hard time seeing my friend's facebook page after he died. Months and years later, it still hurts that FB suggest that I invite him to events. But I don't want to unfriend him, and I'm not sure I want to mess with Facebooks "memorial page" policy.
wocram 10y ago
You could ask the same question with 'sleep' instead of 'general anesthesia'. Every day we are born again (or die, if you want to look at it that way).
- aetherson 10y ago
  Well, maybe. People who believe they have all this completely figured out (in either direction) are deluding themselves.

CountSessine 10y ago

Do you have continuity of thought before and after you undergo general anesthesia? Perhaps, perhaps not - but it does remove any uncertainty, doesn't it? At least with general anesthesia we can say that there is continuity of process and form; with 'digital afterlife', we don't even have that - you've been extinguished and your electronic doppleganger lives happily ever after. 'Digital afterlife' resolves any epistemelogical ambiguity but not in a happy way - it isn't you - we know that. Seems like a pretty lousy afterlife. I'd rather just be remembered.

zyxley 10y ago
If the options were "die" and "die, but with an immortal digital copy", I think I'd still take the second. It wouldn't help me much personally, but zyxley-2 would be able to carry my legacy forward and (hopefully) lessen the burden of grief on others.
- civilian 10y ago
  Might it increase the burden of grief on others? I had a hard time seeing my friend's facebook page after he died. Months and years later, it still hurts that FB suggest that I invite him to events. But I don't want to unfriend him, and I'm not sure I want to mess with Facebooks "memorial page" policy.

wocram 10y ago

You could ask the same question with 'sleep' instead of 'general anesthesia'. Every day we are born again (or die, if you want to look at it that way).

aetherson 10y ago
Well, maybe. People who believe they have all this completely figured out (in either direction) are deluding themselves.