4 ms·

Your "1" doesn't include the chance that not everything we care about is preserved with current techniques. Also people might make a mistake in the freezing pr

• Udo 15y ago
  Your "1" doesn't include the chance that not everything we care about is preserved with current techniques. Also people might make a mistake in the freezing process. [...] I'm sorry I probably didn't make myself clear enough there. This is not my 1 = failure to access preservation technology but actually my category 3 = preservation/restauration failure. I did include those scenarios. Your "3" doesn't include the chance that restoration is impossible Yes, it does include that, more specifically: it takes into account that some minds might not be sufficiently preserved for technical reasons. But if you mean that restoration in general could turn out to be impossible, I'm going to have to take a stand against that. I have a modest background in information technology and biology, and from where I stand there is nothing in principle that precludes restauration. The main question here becomes: how big is the interval between cardiac arrest and cryo? From our current understanding I'd say that we're probably good if this time is between 1 and 2 hours (depending on the temperature of the environment and the manner of death). overly expensive, That's right, because I think that's a ridiculous reason. or not done for some other reason (no one is interested in you). This is what I mean by "persistence failure" (see there).