= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Eliezer_Yudkowsky comments on A Much Better Life? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (173)
http://lesswrong.com/lw/z0/the_pascals_wager_fallacy_fallacy/
only a fallacy if your assignment of probabilities here:
"And cryonics, of course, is the default extrapolation from known neuroscience: if memories are stored the way we now think, and cryonics organizations are not disturbed by any particular catastrophe, and technology goes on advancing toward the physical limits, then it is possible to revive a cryonics patient (and yes you are the same person). There are negative possibilities (woken up in dystopia and not allowed to die) but they are exotic, not having equal probability weight to counterbalance the positive possibilities."
is accurate. I really don't have the expertise to debate this with you. I hope that you are right!
I think the logistical issues discussed above will be the wrench in the works, unfortunately.
Logistical issues are my main concern over cryonics as well. I don't really doubt that in principle the technology could one day exist to revive a frozen person, my doubts are much more about the likelihood of cryonic storage getting me there despite mundane risks like corporate bankruptcy, political upheaval, natural disasters, fires, floods, fraud, etc., etc.