4 ms·

Death isn't just a critical part of the individual life -- rather, it seems key to evolution itself, biological or otherwise. clearing the slate/setting a time

Death isn't just a critical part of the individual life -- rather, it seems key to evolution itself, biological or otherwise. clearing the slate/setting a timeout on any given system seems to be a good way to evict the accumulation of fixed points/cycles and other non-global-maxima that accumulate. I'm completely talking out of my ass here, but I suspect systems will tend towards rent seeking/"cheating"/maintaining a status quo/really, just "overfitting" to the environment by making the ecosystem around them dependent on them. Death ensures resiliency and progress. If we ever actually achieve some form of (pseudo-)immortality, i'd hope that we introduce an "afterlife" which removes the post-mortal from "living" society/ecosystems after s certain point. at most, living society should be able to inspect & affect the post-living system (afterlife), but the post living system should be airgapped from being able to (at least, directly) affect the living one at all. that said, i'd be wary about indirect affects. to die is to not influence. i'm still influenced by the memory/simulacrum of my grand mother who raised me until middle school. thats some degree of affect on my ecosystem, but it isnt what i would call direct. i suppose there need not be a singular timeout or ecosystem a system is depolyed to, so long as it converges to zero. Heck, not even monotonically nor with a consistent cohort of systems.

practice9 3y ago
> "afterlife" which removes the post-mortal from "living" society/ecosystems after s certain point. at most, living society should be able to inspect & affect the post-living system (afterlife), but the post living system should be airgapped from being able to (at least, directly) affect the living one at all Like the Undying Lands in LOTR?
indigochill 3y ago
> at most, living society should be able to inspect & affect the post-living system (afterlife), but the post living system should be airgapped from being able to (at least, directly) affect the living one at all. I feel like this hypothetical scenario is contradictory (and, supposing there was engineering behind both this life and an afterlife, is an argument for keeping the two isolated). Data is code, so data collected from the afterlife is potential for "remote execution from the afterlife" (not that humans are computers, but for example traditionalists who were able to directly study the long-dead would act differently than if they had to piece tradition together from scraps of documents - particularly, it would freeze traditions/memes rather than letting them evolve) and therefore death losing its role as the cessation of influence.
lordnacho 3y ago
> I'm completely talking out of my ass here, but I suspect systems will tend towards rent seeking/"cheating"/maintaining a status quo/really, just "overfitting" to the environment by making the ecosystem around them dependent on them. This is also why institutions should have a lifetime. Corporations, government entities, all the things that don't have a natural life length really ought to.
- SoftTalker 3y ago
  Interesting idea. Like the idea of prohibiting perpetual owership of real property, which I think is a thing in some jurisdictions.
  - lordnacho 3y ago
    Property/Land tax is similar. Put a carrying cost on things, then people will think about where they want to put their eggs.

practice9 3y ago

> "afterlife" which removes the post-mortal from "living" society/ecosystems after s certain point. at most, living society should be able to inspect & affect the post-living system (afterlife), but the post living system should be airgapped from being able to (at least, directly) affect the living one at all Like the Undying Lands in LOTR?

indigochill 3y ago

> at most, living society should be able to inspect & affect the post-living system (afterlife), but the post living system should be airgapped from being able to (at least, directly) affect the living one at all. I feel like this hypothetical scenario is contradictory (and, supposing there was engineering behind both this life and an afterlife, is an argument for keeping the two isolated). Data is code, so data collected from the afterlife is potential for "remote execution from the afterlife" (not that humans are computers, but for example traditionalists who were able to directly study the long-dead would act differently than if they had to piece tradition together from scraps of documents - particularly, it would freeze traditions/memes rather than letting them evolve) and therefore death losing its role as the cessation of influence.

lordnacho 3y ago

> I'm completely talking out of my ass here, but I suspect systems will tend towards rent seeking/"cheating"/maintaining a status quo/really, just "overfitting" to the environment by making the ecosystem around them dependent on them. This is also why institutions should have a lifetime. Corporations, government entities, all the things that don't have a natural life length really ought to.

SoftTalker 3y ago
Interesting idea. Like the idea of prohibiting perpetual owership of real property, which I think is a thing in some jurisdictions.
- lordnacho 3y ago
  Property/Land tax is similar. Put a carrying cost on things, then people will think about where they want to put their eggs.