4 ms·
Regardless of how outlandish this seems, this idea and the similar idea of uploading yourself into an exact digital copy to live forever don't seem too appealin
by justonenote 2y ago
Regardless of how outlandish this seems, this idea and the similar idea of uploading yourself into an exact digital copy to live forever don't seem too appealing to me, for the obvious reason that it's a copy of you, you (the original) would still exist, and die, so what's the benefit to you?
I don't think I'd like knowing that that there was an exact copy of me living on while I (the original) dies. And it seems incredibly egotistical that you would think this is a net good for anybody, that it's worth having a clone of yourself (no matter how exact) living on, and taking up resources etc.
- garbthetill 2y agothe issue is how would you define consciousness? if you killed a program and ran it again, it would still be the same program with the same bugs, i/o etc the only changes would be the memory addresses the program runs on & it's PID. But it is still the same program I think there are net positives to this idea, but the concept is too dystopian for our generation to accept it (if its even possible). I dont think human consciousness is like a state machine, but if it was a copy would not be a copy if you are dead, it would be the canonical verison of you