I haven't seen it before. Maybe if you counted Stephen J. Gould, but I expect he was lying more than crazy.

I guess most of the people I know are, shall we say, secure enough in their identity as iconoclasts, that they can enjoy winning any particular argument without fear.

Hadn't heard about the case of the terminal diseases, either.

I am a man capable of getting into details, I like details and if truth be told I’m rather good at it, I think details are important; so name one person who agreed with me other than superficially?

What ramifications and consequences of the 'atoms are not identity' belief do you think the upvoters of Eliezer are not thinking about? How is their acceptance superficial?

Actually, I'm worried he's having some kind of breakdown.

No you’re not, you’re not worried about that at all

Yes I am worried about that. I don't remember exactly who was on what side in the Upload Wars, but you certainly weren't the only one lined up for - not just destructive teleportation - but destructive uploading as a computer program.

Greg Egan thinks that if you die and get restored from a backup a day ago, you're just losing a day's memories. Even I'm not sure I'd go that far.

Derek Parfit (in the famous mainstream philosophical classic Reasons and Persons) goes farther than either of us by considering the case of incrementally removing and adding memories.

You're not alone. You were part of a small army of transhumanist reductionist philosophers including a majority of the big names. You were quite well aware of that at the time. Your current stance of lone heroic defiance honestly seems to me to go over the edge of insanity.

John, If you have a unique, opinion, write it up somewhere! If you have a rare opinion, link to explanations from those rare individuals.

Oh. Well then, yes, yes I would. If it meant I could self-modify, and especially if it meant I could gain a bit of control over my pair-bonding mechanisms, then I would in a heartbeat.