jkaufman comments on How Likely Is Cryonics To Work? - Less Wrong

18 Post author: jkaufman 25 September 2011 11:38PM

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

Comments (122)

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

Comment author: jkaufman 26 September 2011 05:37:55PM 3 points [-]

It seems to me that if you can figure out some way to help the brain preservation foundation develop a non-cryogenic (i.e., room temp) method of preservation, it could much more than double your chances.

I agree that plastification or something existing would more than double my chances. But a lot of work needs to go into that. I'm not at all convinced that me giving them $300 would come close to doubling my chances.

Comment author: Synaptic 26 September 2011 05:44:56PM 3 points [-]

I agree that $300, with no concomitant time investment, would probably not be enough.

I guess I'm just surprised that a (smart) person could read all of this information about a potentially hugely transformative technology, assign such a low probability (20%) to the likelihood that "not all of what makes you you is encoded in the physical state of the brain," and still just generally not care much and prefer to go play music instead. I just don't get it. Maybe I'm weird.

Comment author: jkaufman 26 September 2011 06:59:34PM 3 points [-]

It seems unlikely to me that I can have a large effect on the probabilities; they will probably stay very small even if I put in a lot of work. So I think time spent on music will make me happier than time spent on cryonics.