MichaelVassar comments on Normal Cryonics - Less Wrong

58 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 19 January 2010 07:08PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (930)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: MichaelVassar 21 January 2010 07:14:41AM 12 points [-]

If you need friends post suspension you can pay for my suspension (currently my budget goes to X-risk) and I will promise to spend a total of at least one subjective current human lifetime sincerely trying to be the best friend I can for you unless the revived get a total of less than 100 subjective human lifetimes of run-time in which case I will give you 1% of my total run-time instead. If that's not enough, you can also share your run-time with me. I will even grant you the right to modify my reward centers to directly make me like you in any copy running on run time you give me. This offer doesn't allow your volition to replace mine in any other respect if the issue is important.

Comment author: orthonormal 21 January 2010 07:26:32AM 9 points [-]

I'd bet karma at 4 to 1 odds that Alicorn finds this proposal deeply disturbing rather than helpful.

Comment author: wedrifid 21 January 2010 07:35:19AM 4 points [-]

You're on. Alicorn, would you be so kind as to arbitrate? We need you to evaluate which of these three categories Michael's offer fits in to:

  1. Deeply Disturbing
  2. Helpful
  3. Just 'somewhat' disturbing all the way through to indifference.

Would 'slightly amusing' count as helpful if it served to create slightly more confidence in the prospect of actively seeking out the friendship the potentially cryonically inclined?

Comment author: Alicorn 21 January 2010 02:11:02PM 5 points [-]

Yep, disturbing. "Deeply" might be pushing it a little. But a) I'll have to mess with my budget to afford one suspension, let alone two, and while I'd chip in for my sister if she'd let me, people I do not yet know and love are not extended the same disposition. b) There's presently no way to enforce such a promise. c) Even if there were, that kind of enforcement would itself be creepy, since my ethics would ordinarily oblige me to abide by any later change of mind. d) This arrangement does nothing to ensure that I will enjoy MichaelVassar's company; I'm sure he's a great person, but there are plenty of great people I just don't click with. e) I do not like the idea of friendships with built-in time quotas, I mean, ew.

Comment author: wedrifid 21 January 2010 02:16:52PM *  4 points [-]

Yep, disturbing. "Deeply" might be pushing it a little.

"Deeply" seemed unlikely given that 'deeply disturbing' would have to be reserved in case Michael had seriously offered his services as a mercenary to carry out a kidnapping, decapitation, and non-consensual vitrification.

I do not like the idea of friendships with built-in time quotas, I mean, ew.

But it is so efficient! Surely Robin has made a post advocating such arrangements somewhere. ;)

Comment author: orthonormal 22 January 2010 01:03:47AM *  2 points [-]

So I guess that's a "push" on the original terms of the bet, falling between "helpful" and "deeply disturbing".

Comment author: wedrifid 22 January 2010 02:07:21AM *  2 points [-]

Yes, bookkeeper loses his overheads. That's what the bookie gets for accepting bets with ties.

Comment author: Alicorn 21 January 2010 02:19:19PM 2 points [-]

Now, Robin, there's a person who regularly deeply disturbs me.