deo comments on The Threat of Cryonics - Less Wrong

36 Post author: lsparrish 03 August 2010 07:57PM

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

Comments (212)

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

Comment author: deo 05 August 2010 07:29:27AM 1 point [-]

Yes, I'm wrong about this being prisoner's dilemma. One side defecting (dieing) against other cooperating (cryopreserving) won't make first side better off and second one worse off.

So it's just insufficient communication/coordination.

Comment author: wedrifid 05 August 2010 12:21:28PM 0 points [-]

We could also consider a game that was perhaps a step closer to the original. Leave cooperation and defection (and their PD laden connotations) behind and just consider a pair who would sincerely rather die than live on without the other. This is plausible even without trawling Shakespeare for fictional examples. Here on lesswrong I have seen the prospect of living on via cryopreservation without a friend joining them described as 'extrovert hell'. Then, as you say, a 'cremation' equilibrium would be the result of insufficient communication/coordination. A high time and or emotional cost to transitioning preferences would contribute to that kind of undesirable outcome.

Incidentally, if we were to consider pair-cryo selection as an actual PD the most obvious scenario seems to be one in which both parties are overwhelmingly spiteful. Cryopreservation is the defect option. Where life is preferred but it is far more important to ensure that the other dies.